Stupid then?
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Hilarious
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/breaking-burnley-fan-behind-white-22246694
If it's this guy, then probably, yeah.
If it is the I'm not a racist goes out of the window.
Hear, hear.
But point scorers gotta point score. Also, virtue signaling is on the rise amongst the young. Almost certainly an artifact of growing up in the 'echo-chamber' age.
The rationale of the average Trump supporter is extremely poorly understood. They're all just shunted into 'haha st00pid hick' because, ironically, the other side isn't interested in learning what exactly is making them vote for someone the vast majority of them don't actually like.
Anyways, all that being said:
You supported Trump, TRUMP. Just read what you've posted. That was your decision, live with the consequences. Personally, i'd never, ever, ever support a man like Trump, he's made a mockery of your country and now you democracy. Utterly bizarre. Honestly, i'm embarrassed for you.
Somehow managing to simultaneously complain about point scoring and virtue signalling and point score and virtue signal.
Interested as to how many of them you personally know.
Might want to work on the logic skills.
Or you're primed to hear everything as an attack.
Grew up in Missouri. Family in N. Carolina. Florida. Know a lot of Church-going folk all across the country.
And what are their reasons for voting for Trump?
Then, what are their reasons for squaring Trump’s actions and statements with their Bible?
Trump has 90%+ approval among Republicans. The idea that the vast majority don't like him is completely baseless and unfounded.
Yeah our problem is our defence/defending.
We are Liverpool pre-VVD.
We are Liverpool pre-VVD.
Not sure if you’re making a deeper philosophical point here, or just on the wrong thread.
Why not both
Touché
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I've come to the conclusion that people support Trump because his image as a successful person validates their backward value system.
Two more points to you, you're doing really well today!
When your post was just the first sentence I was going to request that you first post your own analysis.
Eeeegh. Second sentence. It's kind of looking like you might not understand even if I did reply.
But what the hell. Long story short, all the ones I know who voted for him are a varying combination of:
1. 'Biden's-not-that-different'
2. They're staunchly 'a baby can't defend itself'
3. Strong 'keep your beliefs to yourself and help people who are in need' types who feel aggrieved by a perceived thirty/forty-year assault on their morals/values.
Second question, none of them try to do any of that. Get a 'Trump supporter' in private and talk to them long enough, they'll agree with you he's immoral. The fact that you brought it up is kind of weird: surely you know that not all 'Trump supporters' are cookie-cutter evangelicals frothing at the mouth? Also, you do know the average Bible-thumper doesn't really know 'their' Bible, right?
AKA put that all together and it's the usual 'I'm not voting for him, I'm voting against the other guy'. Their voting their issues, not for Trump.
You could probably get a job at one of the polling places if you wanted.
Isn't #3 in conflinct with their fight to ban abortion? Keep your beliefs to yourself and let women decide over their own body.
Do you think this lack of interest in the other side is exclusive to the left or do you think that there are people on the other side that are guilty of this as well? And if so, do you think Trumps rethoric the last 4 years is contributing to facilitating a dialogue or would you say he tends to use a more polarizing thone?
Again, show some actual evidence that the majority of his voters don't like Trump. Not anecdotes of a handful of people. Actual evidence.
The US hasn't been invaded in decades unless you count 9/11. I'd say they're quite good at defense but the US generally overspends at the expense of other sectors.
Nope, just you wanting to be antagonistic. You still butthurt from getting schooled in science all those years ago?
Remember, their position is that in their minds, they're speaking for the baby. It's essentially, 'Well, what about the baby? The baby doesn't get to decide.'
You do realize people lie in polls and that's how all those polling places got everything so wrong, right?
It's always levelled only at the left; no one chastises the Republicans for completely losing the urban population. It is kind of ironic that in the US, it is always the majority party that gets accused of not listening to the people. At least in the UK for example the Conservatives actually get more votes than Labour.
I suppose from their position it sounds logical, but for us others it really isn't. It's not a baby at the time of abortion, it's a bunch of cells.
A lot of people, and i mean A LOT love to hear they're the best, that everything is everyone else's fault and that they'll be protected by a supreme leader. It's not as if most dictators (not saying Trump is, but he sometimes uses the same kind of rethoric) didn't have huge support from a significant part of the population. It prevents people from questionning their believes and make them feel superior for absolutely no reason. it's just a terrible human trend. It just feels confortable for them.
They didn’t get everything wrong though. In some placed they were off by 5-6%. So let's say in reality only 85% of Republicans approve of Trump as opposed to 93% as the polls suggest. Doesn't really change my point: the vast majority does actually like him.
Joel Glazer wasting club money again.
It also doesn’t make sense on the face of it. Lying about voting for Trump to feck with pollsters, sure (not really, but let’s just assume it’s possible). Answering whether or not you like the guy? With complete anonymity, why would you do that?
You can bet your arse that the glazers voted for trump.
Yeah, exactly. They underestimated his support but overestimated his approval? Come off it.
Of course they did, they organized fundraisers for him...
The markets know they did, the markets know everything.
There's a reason you didn't know he had a speech disorder, and a reason why you chose to focus on the consequences of that speech disorder. It didn't come from a good place. Rather than doubling down on it, in denial of the facts you yourself admit you didn't even have a basic grasp of, why not just step away from the comments and admit you made a mistake?
Joe Biden has a speech disorder. It is an active battle every day to overcome that, and through years of speech therapy he's able to do so most days. It's not "for whatever reason". In moments of weakness he loses that battle. As he gets older he will have more of those moments of weakness. You didn't know he had the speech disorder, nor that he's provided examples of it throughout his lifetime, nor do you even know the basic symptoms of the speech disorder and how they can be managed. Doubling down only makes it worse.
If you read that sentence again, you'll see that it contains the answer to your bolded question. Answer to the second question is too obvious. (Apologies; I don't know your post tendency so I can't tell if you're trying to troll.)
Welp. It's not a simple issue. (also depends on embryology and when/who decides it's a 'fetus' etc)
- Status