Play Devil's advocate -- say all the evidence *is* true of a Trump/Russia partnership, how would you respond?
Not a Trump fan at all, but your thread title is offensive and probably a violation of board rules. If you want reasonable discussion (yeah, like that’s your objective) you might want to change that.
Yeah, well try that tact with a thread about Obama and see where it gets you. I don't see this as a thread worthy of discussion. I suspect that if undeniable evidence were brought forth showing that Trump actively colluded with the Russians to gain a win in a US presidential election even his most ardent supporters would favor impeachment. Not the insane ones, but most of those who otherwise believe in his policies and general anti-progressive agenda are still believers in the sanctity of our electoral system and would oppose someone like Putin trying to put a puppet in the White House. That said, so far there's nothing approaching indisputable proof of collusion. How would you respond to a similar inflammatory question of board liberals about "proof" that Obama did nothing in Benghazi because he didn't want the blow-back to impact his campaign so close to the election? Or proof that Hillary's knowing misuse of a private email server to hide her correspondence was illegal and compromised government secrets. Or proof that the Clinton Foundation was actively paid by foreign governments in exchange for access to the Secretary of State? Put up the proof about any of the hundreds of alleged political scandals and then have the discussion. As it stands, they're all just political talking points for the parties' bases and have a lot more smoke than fire.
e_blazer has nailed it. The premise is on par with an actual Sharknado, but of course if it was proven true, I would want him prosecuted to the fullest extent. The Constitution means more that any single person.
You're dodging. And quit it with this whataboutism tactic -- the premise is straight forward: play Devil's advocate.
Not sure how it violates board rules, but considering currently we have a thread that goes "OBAMA NEEDS TO STFU" and "DID CLINTONS "SUICIDE" ANOTHER KEY WITNESS?" I'm not sure how we can be concerned about reasonable discussions.
None of those things insults members of the board, which is what I understand the rule to be. They're inflammatory to be sure, but they don't call into question the intelligence of those who support Obama or the Clintons the way that "Trumpanzees" does Trump supporters. I see the increasing nastiness in these political threads as something that needs to be moderated. But that's not my job around here, so flame on if it makes you happy.
You don't find libtards as offensive? I see that in many posts by guys such as maris, dalincoln, el presidente etc. have used.
Given that I'm firmly in the kick Trump's ass out of the White House camp, I'm not sure how I'm personally supposed to be offended by the thread title. I do think it violates board rules to refer to those who disagree with you as __panzees. I think, "Welcome to the United States of the Needlessly Offensive" is becoming a more correct way of looking at it. In what way was Fez's question made more effective by referring to those who support Trump as "Trumpanzees"? I generally find that when I want to discuss something with someone, it's best to avoid starting the conversation by calling someone an asshole.
When it's used in a way as to refer to liberals on the board, yes I do find it offensive for the same reason as I'm stating here. FFS, it's not that hard people. Start having better discussions and stop needlessly insulting each other.
Its crazy and really paints a clear picture to me when all parties preach tolerance, but are actually less tolerant. To me thats real sad, because we certainly need more tolerance within our communities.
Once this dangerous idiot is out of office, you will likely see more unity. When you have a president that preaches and supports dividing people then these actions will be the norm.
...I think you are making this into something it's not...it was in no way directed at anyone in particular nor a race....and no one called anyone an ass hole. ...the mods have already said that it did not violate the rules...again, I'm not sure why you are offended by something that was clearly harmless. If you saw the thread title and clicked on it anyway, that's on you.
