The Official "Damned Trump" Thread

[Angrboda]

I'm sorry, could you link me to where I was asked to provide evidence?  If I overlooked it, I most certainly will apologize for my failure to address it.



You suggested that I would never live up to my own standard.  That would be a silly thing to say if I had already met my standard, so obviously you were accusing me of not having done so.  So what standard of mine is it that you were accusing me of not having lived up to?

1. Wheater you were asked or not you made a claim that you didn't back with evidence. Thus the standard claims should be backed up with evidence was not been met.

I have no standard that people should provide evidence they haven't been asked for, so your claim is a bunch of shit. I have no standard that people must supply evidence. You're a lying cunt.

2. I said in this instance you made a claim you didn't back it while asking i back up a claim. And it wasn't an accusation that has a specific moral implication. I was simply pointing out what I feel is an inconsistency without inferring any duplicity or malice behind it.

I have no obligation to provide anything, nor do I demand that anyone provide something I haven't asked for. Cut the shit, asshole. There was no inconsistency. Now you're just telling a bunch of lies. Whether you acknowledge that you meant to make a moral implication, accusing someone of inconsistently applying their standards in the way you suggest is hypocrisy, the claim of which has very definite moral implications, so that's another lie.

[The Architect Of Fate]

I have no standard that people should provide evidence they haven't been asked for, so your claim is a bunch of shit. I have no standard that people must supply evidence. You're a lying cunt.

Irrelevant you still ask for evidence to one set of claims while absolving your own from the condition of evidence. That's not consistent.

I have no obligation to provide anything, nor do I demand that anyone provide something I haven't asked for. Cut the shit, asshole. There was no inconsistency. Now you're just telling a bunch of lies.

Again you ask for evidence for a claim but don't do this yourself for your own claims. This is not consistent. 

 Whether you acknowledge that you meant to make a moral implication, accusing someone of inconsistently applying their standards in the way you suggest is hypocrisy, the claim of which has very definite moral implications, so that's another lie.

No, it's not hypocrisy that requires willful duplicity of which I have not accused anyone. It's possible for a person to simply be oblivious to inconsistency in their actions and that can be  Amoral. So it's not a lie.

Anyway, this conversation seems to be going nowhere.So this will be my last response on the matter. Good night

[Angrboda]

I have no standard that people should provide evidence they haven't been asked for, so your claim is a bunch of shit. I have no standard that people must supply evidence. You're a lying cunt.

Irrelevant you still ask for evidence to one set of claims while absolving your own from the condition of evidence. That's not consistent.

I never did any such thing. You're just telling lie after lie after lie. I could have refused to provide evidence or I could have provided it. You'll never know because you never asked.

I have no obligation to provide anything, nor do I demand that anyone provide something I haven't asked for. Cut the shit, asshole. There was no inconsistency. Now you're just telling a bunch of lies.

Again you ask for evidence for a claim but don't do this yourself for your own claims. This is not consistent. 

You're right, I didn't ask myself for evidence, because that would be stupid. I asked you for evidence and nobody asked me for evidence, which is inconsistent, but I don't control others asking or not asking.

You keep conflating asking with providing. There is a difference between the providing because there was a difference in the asking. That's as it should be. As a practical matter, the evidence one could provide for any claim could be limitless. I might be asked to provide statistics and end up being pressed for a treatise on Fisher's groundbreaking work on statistics to back up my interpretation, and then the theory of measurement to back up Fisher and so on until doomsday. What stops that is the requirement of the person who is skeptical and what their level of satisfaction requires. And that's indicated by their asking or not asking for more.

 Whether you acknowledge that you meant to make a moral implication, accusing someone of inconsistently applying their standards in the way you suggest is hypocrisy, the claim of which has very definite moral implications, so that's another lie.

No, it's not hypocrisy that requires willful duplicity of which I have not accused anyone. It's possible for a person to simply be oblivious to inconsistency in their actions and that can be  Amoral. So it's not a lie.

Anyway, this conversation seems to be going nowhere.So this will be my last response on the matter. Good night

hy·poc·ri·sy
/həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

Nothing about intent. You claimed I had a standard and that I wasn't meeting it. That's hypocrisy. It would be worse if it were intentional hypocrisy, but it needn't be.

Yes, I fully understand why you're abandoning this discussion, too. You're reduced to telling lies about even the meaning of words!

[The Architect Of Fate]

First, I didn't abandon shit nor did I tell a single fucking lie. I ended this conversation because there was fuck all left to say and even after your waffling response there still isn't.

I never did any such thing. You're just telling lie after lie after lie. I could have refused to provide evidence or I could have provided it. You'll never know because you never asked.

Yes, you fucking did and no I have not told a single fucking lie in this whole thread. The fact is you made an unsubstantiated claim then berated me for doing the same thing. The fact no one asked is irrelevant to that fact.

You're right, I didn't ask myself for evidence, because that would be stupid. I asked you for evidence and nobody asked me for evidence, which is inconsistent, but I don't control others asking or not asking.

The fact is you made an unsubstantiated claim then berated me for doing the same thing. The fact no one asked is irrelevant to that fact.

You keep conflating asking with providing. There is a difference between the providing because there was a difference in the asking. That's as it should be. As a practical matter, the evidence one could provide for any claim could be limitless. I might be asked to provide statistics and end up being pressed for a treatise on Fisher's groundbreaking work on statistics to back up my interpretation, and then the theory of measurement to back up Fisher and so on until doomsday. What stops that is the requirement of the person who is skeptical and what their level of satisfaction requires. And that's indicated by their asking or not asking for more.

It's not a conflation you made a claim that you didn't substantiate with evidence then you rode my ass for doing the same thing. If you were consistent you could have simply cited a source for the statistics. It's not fucking complicated people do it on this forum all the time without being asked. So this just like a bunch of epistemic waffling.

Nothing about intent. You claimed I had a standard and that I wasn't meeting it. That's hypocrisy. It would be worse if it were intentional hypocrisy, but it needn't be.

I'll grant you intent was a mistake (you hypocritical without it being intentional) but nope I accused of inconsistency, not hypocrisy those are not the same thing. Not all inconsistency is hypocrisy.

Yes, I fully understand why you're abandoning this discussion, too. You're reduced to telling lies about even the meaning of words!

I have not told a single lie. I did misuse a word but that was a mistake but I didn't lie. So ends this pointless dick measuring contest.

---

[Fake Messiah]

Pedo in chief

[The Architect Of Fate]

Pedo in chief

Color me surprised

---

Seems Trump may have finally thrown Jared under the bus. I'm surprised he lasted this long.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/he-s-just-c...-1.5333642

[Angrboda]

First, I didn't abandon shit nor did I tell a single fucking lie. I ended this conversation because there was fuck all left to say and even after your waffling response there still isn't.

I never did any such thing. You're just telling lie after lie after lie. I could have refused to provide evidence or I could have provided it. You'll never know because you never asked.

Yes, you fucking did and no I have not told a single fucking lie in this whole thread. The fact is you made an unsubstantiated claim then berated me for doing the same thing. The fact no one asked is irrelevant to that fact.

You're right, I didn't ask myself for evidence, because that would be stupid. I asked you for evidence and nobody asked me for evidence, which is inconsistent, but I don't control others asking or not asking.

The fact is you made an unsubstantiated claim then berated me for doing the same thing. The fact no one asked is irrelevant to that fact.

You keep conflating asking with providing. There is a difference between the providing because there was a difference in the asking. That's as it should be. As a practical matter, the evidence one could provide for any claim could be limitless. I might be asked to provide statistics and end up being pressed for a treatise on Fisher's groundbreaking work on statistics to back up my interpretation, and then the theory of measurement to back up Fisher and so on until doomsday. What stops that is the requirement of the person who is skeptical and what their level of satisfaction requires. And that's indicated by their asking or not asking for more.

It's not a conflation you made a claim that you didn't substantiate with evidence then you rode my ass for doing the same thing. If you were consistent you could have simply cited a source for the statistics. It's not fucking complicated people do it on this forum all the time without being asked. So this just like a bunch of epistemic waffling.

Nothing about intent. You claimed I had a standard and that I wasn't meeting it. That's hypocrisy. It would be worse if it were intentional hypocrisy, but it needn't be.

I'll grant you intent was a mistake (you hypocritical without it being intentional) but nope I accused of inconsistency, not hypocrisy those are not the same thing. Not all inconsistency is hypocrisy.

Yes, I fully understand why you're abandoning this discussion, too. You're reduced to telling lies about even the meaning of words!

I have not told a single lie. I did misuse a word but that was a mistake but I didn't lie. So ends this pointless dick measuring contest.

---

You're just a firehose of falsehoods. I haven't done any of the things you've accused me of here. You're dishonest and dumber than a bag of cunt hair. You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you in the ass. Fuck off and die.

[The Architect Of Fate]

It's ironic coming from people who in 2021 still have Obama on the brain.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Boru

[Ravenshire]

She won the pop vote in a landslide.  In fact, she won it by a historic margin that would only be eclipsed by the next democrat candidates even more historic margin.

(my bolding)

Landslide?!? Historic margins?!? M-kay...

Would that be her whopping 2% margin, or her not quite 3 million vote margin? Biden did do better, 4.5% and 7 million vote margins. Historic? Not even close.

People who had a larger margin by percentage than either Hillary or Joe:
1788–89 - George Washington
1792 - George Washington
1820 - James Monroe
1804 - Thomas Jefferson
1816 - James Monroe
1808 - James Madison
1920 - Warren Harding
1924 - Calvin Coolidge
1936 - Franklin Roosevelt
1972 - Richard Nixon
1800 - Thomas Jefferson
1964 - Lyndon Johnson
1904 - Theodore Roosevelt
1984 - Ronald Reagan
1832 - Andrew Jackson
1932 - Franklin Roosevelt
1928 - Herbert Hoover
1956 - Dwight Eisenhower
1912 - Woodrow Wilson
1836 - Martin Van Buren
1828 - Andrew Jackson
1856 - James Buchanan
1872 - Ulysses Grant
1952 - Dwight Eisenhower
1860 - Abraham Lincoln
1864 - Abraham Lincoln
1940 - Franklin Roosevelt
1980 - Ronald Reagan
1908 - William Taft
1996 - Bill Clinton
1988 - George H. W. Bush
1944 - Franklin Roosevelt
2008 - Barack Obama
1852 - Franklin Pierce
1796 - John Adams
1900 - William McKinley
1840 - William Henry Harrison
1992 - Bill Clinton
1868 - Ulysses Grant
1848 - Zachary Taylor
1948 - Harry Truman

People who had a larger margin by popular vote than either Hillary or Joe::
1972 - Richard Nixon
1984 - Ronald Reagan
1964 - Lyndon Johnson
1936 - Franklin Roosevelt
1956 - Dwight Eisenhower
2008 - Barack Obama
1980 - Ronald Reagan
1996 - Bill Clinton
1924 - Calvin Coolidge
1988 - George H. W. Bush
1932 - Franklin Roosevelt

The only historic number was Biden's vote total. Largest in U.S. history. Of course, when discussing total votes for a candidate, that puts 4 other candidates who received more votes than Hillary ahead of her: Biden, Trump, and Obama, twice.

Nothing about Hillary's numbers were historic, except that she had the largest popular vote margin of anyone to win the popular vote, but lose the EC. For Biden, only his totals are historic, not his margins. As for landslides, Nixon, Reagan, LBJ, Roosevelt, et al. have that shit locked down. Nixon beat McGovern by nearly 18,000,000 votes and 520-18 in the EC. That, is a landslide. Hell, Nixon's popular vote margin was more than the total popular vote received by any one of some 35 presidential election winners, starting with Harding who collected a mere 16 million votes.

Source for the above.