Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

George Floyd Protests and Riots

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Honestly I do not understand the why very well. I can say this though that Trump is way better at entertaining and pushing a narrative than anyone on the left. He validates his base and channels their anger.

    Of course a complete and utter disregard of facts helps that but at the end of the day jobs matter. He was gifted a strong economy and he made it stronger with sugar candy tax cuts. Then the virus erased it and now the challenge to Dems and Rep is to build it up before 2022. It will be interesting if Republicans can replicate Trump again in 4 years. I am not sure its possible but who knows.
    Last edited by Gamble1; 11-04-2020, 11:41 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      So liberals are grieving because this is a close election and they just cannot believe so many supported Trump?

      I’ll tell you why he got a lot of support. The arrogance and condescension coming from the left makes many people deeply resent liberals. It’s not their immoral policies that breed contempt. It is this attitude on the left that the “deplorables” vote against their own interests because they are dumb azzes. Who the F do they think they are!?!?
      People can't believe WHY others supported Trump in those numbers.

      It's not like he was Ronald Reagan.

      He's an arrogant, ignorant, buffoon (to use V's word)... a liar... a cheat... an authoritarian... Lacks decorum. Lacks understanding. Lacks sympathy. Lacks an understanding of government. Terrible political instincts. Divisive... Dangerously inept... Actually, just dangerous (inspiring hate and violence).
      The list goes on.

      So, no, you're not explaining why he got a lot of support.

      I think you might do better just to boil it down to this:
      He's a bully. He says 'mean' things about democrats that Limbaugh and Fox News have made the enemy to a group of people susceptible to propaganda (look in the mirror for this one), he regurgitates conspiracy theories (something they've been conditioned to believe as simple answers to complex questions and a natural inclination to government distrust), and because many of them live in rural areas that serve the same role as the echo chambers they've been drawn to online. Between friends family, AM radio, Fox News, and an inability to separate fact from fiction online (particularly social media)... I think we have the starting of a better understanding of their devotion.

      Mix in some anger (most of not all irrational anger)... some fear of change...

      To use a cliche', there's no 'there' there... There's no rational reason for cult-like devotion.
      Last edited by Bball; 11-05-2020, 12:17 AM.
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • He gets a lot of support because he pushes back against the leftist narratives. He is not a virtuous man, but few politicians are. He is no more a liar or cheat than any other politician, and definitely less of an authoritarian than Biden could be or Obama was (I don't think people know what it means to be authoritarian if they think Trump is authoritarian). He calls out the media for what it is, propaganda for the Democrats and establishment. He is an anti-estblishment and pro-America candidate first and foremost. That is why people like him.

        All of this becomes a lot easier to see when you stop trusting the media.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Bball View Post

          Rush Limbaugh picked up on it. If that's not where you heard it, he definitely heard it somewhere too and ran with it today:

          RUSH: Now, I haven’t been able to confirm this. I happen to think this is probably true. “Wisconsin now has more votes than people who are registered to vote. The total number of registered voters in Wisconsin is” 3,129,000 (round it off). “The total number of votes cast in Wisconsin is” 3,239,920. So 3.1 million registered voters; 3.23 million votes cast. (interruption)

          Nah. No, no, no, no, no, no. How does that happen? “That is direct evidence of voter fraud.” Trump people are totally aware of this. They are as up to speed on this as… There’s nobody better to be running this than the Trump family and the team of people that they have put together. There’s nobody better to be running this operation.
          No actually I saw it retweeted by someone on twitter yesterday morning. i have no idea where Rush got it from.

          I have an amusing Rush story though that you should find humor in. It was the year of our Lord 1988 and a young Peck was driving on his way to his new job working, it was his first day there. With all of the vim and vigor of a newly minted Paramedic he drove down the open rode early in the A.M. (06:30 to be precise) listening to the local FM radio station that was playing the rock of the day but also played plenty of earlier rock as well (at the time hair bands were all the rage mind you) but the morning D.J. said that coming up right after Winger we have some new Rush for you. With great anticipation while listening to "Seventeen" I anticipated hearing the dulcet sounds of Geddy Lee, the fret board wizardry of Alex Lifeson and the God of the skins Neil Peart. I just prayed that they were going to return to their rock hits like "the trees" and "working man" and not "subdivisions".

          But then all of a sudden instead of the music of Rush I am hearing this guy who did a 5 minute bit with lot's of comedy and some political commentary. It was the weirdest thing I'd ever heard because right in the middle of the morning drive instead of hearing my music I was listening to this guy go on about Bellah Abzug, who at the time I had no idea even was. Anyway believe it or not he was hilarious at the time and honestly like nothing I'd ever heard before.

          I became a ditto head from the very late 80's until midway through the late 90's. Early on his show was far more humor and playing musical comedy gags but once he got powerful his show changed and then as time moved on I changed as well. It was well over 20 years between times I heard him again and one day I was riding with a person to another site for inspection and he had him and on and honestly it was just cringe worthy how bad it had gotten. There was no jokes, no gag songs just him pontificating for the entire time I listened to him. Hell he didn't even take callers that I heard. His voice was totally different than what I remember it and well honestly he's just old now. What's funny is when I first heard him he was significantly younger than what I am right now. I later learned he lost his hearing and has an implant and that is why he sounds different.

          But make no mistake during the first part of the Clinton administration Rush was on absolute fire and was a master of his craft for the time. However like all things, time is undefeated.

          Sorry I know that had nothing to do with anything but I just found it funny to hear Rush's name again.


          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment


          • I remember him from about that period, on IIRC Q95, and I think it was a replay I'd sometimes hear, like a really early Sunday morning program. 4AM? 5AM? 6AM? 7AM? Somewhere in that window.

            What I remember being different about him then was a lot of the schtick was played off with some sarcasm. "Maggot infested hippy" SEEMED to be said with a wink. And it was political, but not overly the top and didn't seem like he took himself THAT seriously. Or at least didn't seem to have this air of "I'm a really important person" vibe.

            Yes, he lost his hearing. It was right around the same window of time that his OxyContin addiction had been acknowledged. Coincidence?

            There was a time, as his hearing was going away, and before his cochlear implant, that it really got sad. At some point he had to admit to the hearing loss and confess that they'd been using tricks in the studio for him to communicate with callers when the volume control on the headphones was no longer enough (I assume that meant teleprompter style prompts), and fewer callers too.

            But he more or less had to confess to this because as it went along, because it was more than just caller changes and communication he had to deal with. He lost control of his voice. If you've worked a mic before, you knew what he was trying to do, but he just had no reference as to what he was doing, other than muscle memory I guess. And apparently that failed him. He's never been one to swallow his words to sound deep, but he lost control of the balance. He'd get almost chipmunky trying to modulate his voice and project emotions verbally. It was bad...

            The cochlear implant made a MAJOR improvement in his ability to do his show. In fact, I don't know how long he could've continued down that other road, and the fans stay with him. For a short period, yes... particularly since he was talking about his hearing loss and this cochlear implant he was going to try. So there was light at the end of the tunnel, and they stayed with him. But it was pretty bad in that window of time.
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Bball View Post

              People can't believe WHY others supported Trump in those numbers.

              It's not like he was Ronald Reagan.

              He's an arrogant, ignorant, buffoon (to use V's word)... a liar... a cheat... an authoritarian... Lacks decorum. Lacks understanding. Lacks sympathy. Lacks an understanding of government. Terrible political instincts. Divisive... Dangerously inept... Actually, just dangerous (inspiring hate and violence).
              The list goes on.

              So, no, you're not explaining why he got a lot of support.

              I think you might do better just to boil it down to this:
              He's a bully. He says 'mean' things about democrats that Limbaugh and Fox News have made the enemy to a group of people susceptible to propaganda (look in the mirror for this one), he regurgitates conspiracy theories (something they've been conditioned to believe as simple answers to complex questions and a natural inclination to government distrust), and because many of them live in rural areas that serve the same role as the echo chambers they've been drawn to online. Between friends family, AM radio, Fox News, and an inability to separate fact from fiction online (particularly social media)... I think we have the starting of a better understanding of their devotion.

              Mix in some anger (most of not all irrational anger)... some fear of change...

              To use a cliche', there's no 'there' there... There's no rational reason for cult-like devotion.
              I agree with the majority of what you post. I do not like Trump but I hate politicians. I find some satisfaction we’ve had a clown take over government because I largely hate the swamp in DC.

              Also I am not bothered by Trump’s idiocy as much as I am bothered by Biden’s corruption. I am not really bothered by Biden’s dementia because quite frankly I have a who gives a F attitude about our government other than keep the status quo and skew conservative.

              So this might explain why I voted Trump but I don’t mind Biden. He’s just another crook and liar but he will keep my portfolio intact because he’s not going to veer off into Communism. Wall Street will pay him off securing my retirement/investments. And in 4 years the GOP faces a weak ticket regardless.

              This is why I am good.

              Edit: BTW, I did explain a big reason why he got support. You didn’t process that. It is really what I call negative support. Graphic-er has also explained it. Eleazar explained the positive support...something I am less inclined to.

              I would say half the Trump supporters like him and the other half simply don’t like liberals. The reasons why Trump gets support includes both components.
              Last edited by BlueNGold; 11-05-2020, 05:55 AM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                6) The Democratic Socialists are not going away. As they take over the party, what happens to the many social liberal / fiscal conservatives (i.e. people like vapacersfan). They cannot stay in the same party with AOC and people who want reparations (which is just a code word for everything you have). I see the old guard falling and many people shifting to the GOP. Money talks. Bullshid walks and they will be walking.
                Just my .02

                1. I am not sure Biden won this election as much as POTUS Trump lost it (and I honestly think COVID is a huge part of that)
                2. Personally I am surprised how terrible the polling industry did. Two jobs I should have looked at pursuing are meteorologist and pollsters - be wrong 99.9% of the time and still be employed
                3. I personally expected a huge blue wave. It has to be a blow to the left that even with a POTUS who was supposedly this “unfavorable” the left was not able to pick up much (if any?) ground in the house and senate
                4. I personally considered myself a pretty hard core republican for years and years. Even grew up with Rush on every day from noon-3PM on 630 WMAL anytime we got in the cars (and years later his show was followed by Hannity). With that said I personally feel the Republican Party lost me when they went extreme.

                Lastly, I am so happy the elections are over. Some days I just need an escape from being deployed overseas and normally that would be FB, Twitter, IG, etc. During the last year it has been just as exhausting browsing SM as it has been being away from family (and other things I love - like Chipotle, 5 guys, and Panera).

                Comment


                • I wonder if they just decided to stop counting votes since this election isn't all that important anyway. I find it very peculiar they are taking this long. How come some states like Florida seem to handle it well and we have Nevada still out there at 75%? What are they doing, waiting until the rest of the country has voted so they can hedge their bets at the casinos?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                    Just my .02

                    1. I am not sure Biden won this election as much as POTUS Trump lost it (and I honestly think COVID is a huge part of that)
                    2. Personally I am surprised how terrible the polling industry did. Two jobs I should have looked at pursuing are meteorologist and pollsters - be wrong 99.9% of the time and still be employed
                    3. I personally expected a huge blue wave. It has to be a blow to the left that even with a POTUS who was supposedly this “unfavorable” the left was not able to pick up much (if any?) ground in the house and senate
                    4. I personally considered myself a pretty hard core republican for years and years. Even grew up with Rush on every day from noon-3PM on 630 WMAL anytime we got in the cars (and years later his show was followed by Hannity). With that said I personally feel the Republican Party lost me when they went extreme.

                    Lastly, I am so happy the elections are over. Some days I just need an escape from being deployed overseas and normally that would be FB, Twitter, IG, etc. During the last year it has been just as exhausting browsing SM as it has been being away from family (and other things I love - like Chipotle, 5 guys, and Panera).
                    Yeah I think no one expected this high of a turnout which is why polls were probably off. This is a historic turnout and it involved both sides.

                    The biggest tell was peoples belief that Trump would recover the economy better than Biden. That is probably what is most important to people in general. In addition this is only the 4th time in history a sitting president has lost an election. A sitting president has a huge advantage in a reelection.

                    I am glad the ads here are over with. Talk about a waste of money.

                    Comment


                    • Very interesting takes coming out in the independent media that at the end of the day this is an election about culture. Trump didn't have any real policy that he was pushing. Biden didn't have any real policy issues either. It was all about who was more corrupt, and who do you think will tackle COVID crisis better going forward. I mean all Biden every said was wear a mask and avoid more deaths. But then you look at the local elections and Marijuana Legalization or Decriminalization won everywhere it was on the ballot, Florida voted for $15 minimum wage even though Trump won the state. And everywhere that the Democrats ran a republican lite candidate they got trounced. Meanwhile the Squad all get relected with no issues, though that might be just a gerrymander thing. Biden did terribly with Latinos, Trump out performed with Latinos. Sanders dominated with Latinos in the primary....

                      So very interesting that people are going for progressive policies like Weed and $15 minimum wage, but they are rejecting the establishment democrat culture. If the Dems run a candidate that argues for progressive policies while rejecting woke culture, cancel culture. They would probably run the table...

                      My random conclusions about all this:
                      -If not for the virus Trump would have trounced Biden.
                      -Trump campaigns like a populist and only talked about cultural issues, governed like a Mitt Romney, I mean you have to admit outside of foreign policy he was very much conservative.
                      -Mitt Romney ran on conservative policy and lost because for most part Conservative policy isn't all that popular. He lost...
                      -Biden ran on culture and virus and might barely eek out a victory, mean while across the country voters for the most part rejected democrats down the ballot in places that were in contention.
                      -Conclusion, Democrats will lose on culture.
                      -Democrats would fair much better with progressive policy.
                      -Establishment Democrates are corporatists so they won't adopt progressive policies.
                      -This culture war is 100% about allowing both political parties to get away with doing nothing. Each side stakes out an opposite partisan view on almost everything regardless of how stupid it is.

                      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                      Comment


                      • Looks like Trump’s lead in Georgia is under 18k now. They are still counting ballets in the Atlanta metro area. We will probably know about Georgia soon.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                          He gets a lot of support because he pushes back against the leftist narratives. He is not a virtuous man, but few politicians are. He is no more a liar or cheat than any other politician, and definitely less of an authoritarian than Biden could be or Obama was (I don't think people know what it means to be authoritarian if they think Trump is authoritarian). He calls out the media for what it is, propaganda for the Democrats and establishment. He is an anti-estblishment and pro-America candidate first and foremost. That is why people like him.

                          All of this becomes a lot easier to see when you stop trusting the media.
                          Imagine believing all of this
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Today could be a good day for trash Pelosi/Schummer to move out of the way, they are both worthless pieces of trash that bring nothing.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Imagine if Nancy/Schummer picked more people like this instead of the people their donors tell them to.



                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                                Imagine believing all of this
                                I concur with Eleazar though I am sure Trump is very hard to work for and within his circle of power, very much authoritarian.

                                That's NOT to say he's a fascist like many in the Dem Party. Big Tech is censoring people like fascists. Cancel culture is all about fascism. Shutting people down when you don't like what they have to say.

                                The coming years will involve a lot of court battles and free speech cases. Nicolas Sandman beat some azz recently and that's just a start.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X