DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Liberal Education at Work

Crine!

I stated straight facts and all you can do is come up with this?

Btw, black people didn’t overwhelmingly support HRC. Just Incase you forgot, it was one of the lowest voter turnouts for the entire country, specifically black people, and largely due to Hillary.

I obviously disagree with my peeps not showing up, but that FACT does fly in the face of your feelings.

So you didn’t catch me on one of those days. I’m using straight up facts, and you and others are...well, alternative news.

Oh, and what nerve does a trump supporter have telling someone about oppressing of people. You voted for an alt-right candidate who dodged the draft.

Facts. So maybe you should check yourself and your own oppressive candidates. Cause at least I didn’t vote for the guy who gave the white supremacist a hard on.

Not usually one to point out spelling errors... but was this supposed to be "crime!" or should there be a hashtag in front of it?

Assuming you mean crime, who said that? I'm not a liberal totalitarian that wants to make voting for people illegal.

I'm just saying it's difficult to put together an argument that you are oppressed when you vote (an opportunity not typically afforded to oppressed people) for someone who was heavily influenced by a woman who had genocidal intentions for you (again, a sympathy not usually characteristic of an oppressed people).

I'm just trying to get a better understanding.

it's short for crying. And I'm crying because this notion that black people overwhelming supported HRC is so false that it becomes absurd.

Also you sure you're not a totalitarian?

TRUMP: Get rid of all the black people. I want them off the floor now.

"Oh, that's just an off color statement. Hard to take seriously, really."

I'm pretty sure he meant it as 'cryin!'-- as if he found the suggestion to be so laughable. Typical snippy one liner from that poster.

No, your facts are followed by racist, stereotypical opinions.

Near 90% support for Hillary is overwhelming support. Lowest turnout in history still adds up to millions of votes.

Margaret Sanger's feelings on black people is not a matter of my own opinion LOL.

So long as you support a candidate like Hillary and a Party influenced to this day by people like Sanger, you don't deserve to be taken seriously. The "discussion" doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. You can't pick and choose who your oppressors are, throw some crap about it being ok for your candidate to look up to a clear example of what you claim to be the problem today, then get all butt hurt because some orange clown says something that hurts your feelings. Chastise people all you want for voting for Trump, but if you aren't going to ever take the subject seriously, stop with this righteous BS that everyone else should.

Compared to a woman who wanted to wipe black people off the planet???

Actually Devil was right all along.

African-American vote in Democratic Primaries: 75.9% Clinton, 23.1% Sanders

African-American vote in General Election: 88% Clinton, 8% Trump

Have you noticed how all of a sudden guys like CHS and Swish are trying to re-define "overwhelming"? Typical liberal tactic to control the language when they don't have content to stand on.

They are feelings over facts kind of people. I've gotten used to them.

Wrong. And now you’re blatantly lying.

Everything I stated was the absolute truth. There is a huge disparity with how cops treat blacks compared to how they treat whites. It’s been well documented throughout our history, and yet the fact that you’re trying to state otherwise is not surprising, however disappointing it might be.

And do I need to continue posting what the term ‘racist’ means? The majority of the board some to be completely ignorant on that.

Or maybe it’s you don’t like being called out on things you clearly know little about.

What you’re trying to argue is essentially a pipeline of racism with regards to politicians.

If you want to go there, then don’t be upset when I start relating you to the Klan. Cause if you wanna push that narrative, then I can certainly play by your rules, and still school your ass up and down this board.

That orange clown is also the guy you voted for. That orange clown is an alt - right candidate, something you voted for. That orange clown has empowered white supremacist to once again come out of hiding, in our streets chanting dumb crap like blood and soil, ya know, the guy you voted for.

That orange clown dodged the draft, something you voted for.

So don’t tell me to stop doing anything while you continue voting in blatant racist into office.

Cause cops and racism goes hand and hand like peanut butter and jelly.

You mean like how guys like you appropriated Chicago to mean black people?

Not surprising that an alt right guy and a cop agree with each other on the board.

You use these terms and you have no idea what they even mean. Again, feelings over facts. You have gone so far off the deep end to the left that you can no longer differentiate between anybody to the right of about John McCain.

Remember when you asked me "you can't possibly believe that Trump thinks health insurance costs $12?", and then I listed 4 interviews where Trump rambled on about health insurance like it was life insurance, each time saying it cost $12 or $14 a month, and then you tried to argue every quote must have been taken out of context, and then after I posted the full context of each quote, you basically just said "no, this isn't real", despite the obvious fact that it indeed was?

Why is it always the guys who have no conception of reality and couldn't argue their way out of a paper bag that are the first to parrot that nasally nerd's "facts don't care about your feelings" quote?

No, we're just smart enough to realize that not voting for someone is obviously not supporting them. I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept to grasp. Then again, it's impossible to have conversations with Cons. When they say things like,
"So long as you support a candidate like Hillary and a Party influenced to this day by people like Sanger, you don't deserve to be taken seriously. The "discussion" doesn't deserve to be taken seriously."
it makes a conversation impossible to happen. Especially when the cons have supported Henry Kissinger and Oliver North. Equally despicable up there with Sanger. I'm not saying this to whatabout anyone, but it's important for us to be able to look into our history and learn from it and grow from it. Criticism is not hate, it's a chance to grow. Unfortunately a lot of cons on here don't want to hear that.

Again, false.

But leave it to Haus to spread fake news all the time. You’ve demonstrated that you have no idea what you’re talking about in damn near every topic we discuss.

You and devil still haven’t refuted anything I said, and yet got the audacity to talk about feelings.

I stated straight up facts, and you’re getting emotional. I’m sure the tampons are on sale at cvs, go get a few.

I don't even waste my time with Haus anymore. I put him on ignore once I figured he was alt-right. It was a sad moment, because I gave him the benefit of the doubt for years before he started to say black people were inherently violent.

Not surprised a liberal who benefits from oppressing his own people has zero to say about the associations and influences of his own candidate.

I mean hell, you could have at least made the attempt to rationalize what you did. You could have at least come up with some lame azz "well, Hillary only respected her for the abortion stuff, she didn't agree in the least bit about wanting to kill all blacks, and I know deep in my heart that Hillary doesn't feel the same way".

Instead, you try to go on a racist internet rampage, hoping against hope people forget what you got called out for and have no answer for.

Oh, Hillary Clinton is most definitely racist.

I'm just not sure how her supporting Planned Parenthood means that one can pretend Trump's overt white supremacy is merely "off color".

Typical Fence Sitter, put your fingers in your ears when you don't like the opinions of others.

For what? It’s not like you will listen anyway. Why waste my time?

And did you refute ANYTHING I said? No. You whined until you finally got somebody to show up that finds a way to brown nose you every time you post.

Haus follows you around like a little lost puppy in the rain.

I’d find that cute if it wasn’t for the fact that cops like shooting dogs too.

lol what fence do I sit on? And yeah man, that's the entire point of the ignore function on message boards.

Haus is entertaining to argue with. He’s Vambo without posting memes all the time. Completely unaware of the world around them.

Remember last week when you got upset after you couldn't explain how it wasn't racist when Trump posted a racist graphic from a white supremacy website, and you went on a simpering rant about how it was mean and disrespectful that I point out Trump wears a wig, and then claimed you weren't going to listen to it anymore (only to come back out of hiding once enough time had passed for you to safely ignore the question about Trump's wildly racist tweet)?

I don't care to get into your ongoing argument with Devil or any other conservative/moderate you've somehow managed to alienate in this thread. My contribution was that blacks voted for Hillary in the primaries (76%) and the general (88%). We can quibble about what exactly constitutes 'overwhelming'. In some contexts, the numbers above (especially 76%) would not really be overwhelming. In the context of election demographics, it's pretty overwhelming. For example-- in comparison, only 56% of whites voted for Trump in the general election.

THAT makes a conversation impossible to happen?

I stated a fact about a person who influenced Hillary Clinton.
Neither you or Swish have disproved that.

Swish STILL hasn't had a single thing to say about that.

No, CHS, what makes it impossible to have a conversation is that when addressed about a specific point, guys like Swish, PDF,and even yourself try to change the subject.

So yeah, when Swish goes on his internet rampage about stuff that has nothing to do with my original query, he doesn't deserve to be taken seriously, because he isn't being serious. And when you see his behavior magnified to varying degrees by other posters, and it's the same old crap, then yeah, the topic doesn't deserve to be taken seriously until serious people are willing to have a serious conversation.

I promised Portland that I'd stop posting memes for a while... and time is almost up on that.

I didn't change any subject at all.

I asked you how Hillary Clinton being a racist and supporting Planned Parenthood somehow makes Trump's blatant white supremacy something to be written off as "off color".

How are we supposed to have a conversation when you want me to disprove "facts"? Also you're going to need to have a point if you want to have a conversation, if not you're just posting trivia.

You sit high on your fence and block out anything and anyone who disagrees with your opinion.
You only listen to the birds singing your song.

What? You’re arguing from a number without realizing that damn near half the country didn’t even bother showing up.

That’s completely throws a wrench into what could be considered as “overwhelming”, regardless of how hard you try to ignore it.

For the people that DID vote, you further leave out stats trying to support your flawed ass opinion.

You mention that only 56% of whites voted for trump. It’s actually 58%.

What you continue to FAIL to mention is the fact that white people voted for trump 58% to Hillary’s 37%

That’s an Important stat that you either ignored, or didn’t post because you know it would screw up your argument.

Further more, while blacks did vote for Hillary, she didn’t overwhelming win blacks like obama, or even bill, did when they ran. She had much lower turnout amongst minorities.

But for the minorities that did show up, are you surprised they rather vote for Hillary than trump?

Like seriously, are you really that unaware as to the reasons why? Why in God’s name would they vote for somebody who has alt right and white supremacist motivated as all hell?

Minorities voted for Clinton simply because the alternative was much much worse.

And that has already proven to be completely true.

Are you confusing fence sitting with sitting on a high horse?

Weak sauce man!

If I didn't want to know your thoughts on Hillary and Margaret I wouldn't have brought it up!

As for everything else you brought up, I don't care because it has nothing to do with what I originally brought up. Your massive deflection is what was a waste of your time. Separate talking points, separate conversation.

If you don't have an answer for it, then say you don't. That's fine! I wasn't posting to pick a fight and I wasn't making that post trying to get a "Win".

Yep, the typical angry black man excuse.

I spit straight facts and all you can do is go “can’t be taken seriously”

We know why cops don’t take facts seriously.

No, the real talent is staying on one side of the fence tossing verbal grenades over the fence at the other side and accomplishing nothing.

And now it's time for this week's installment of 40 not knowing the meaning of basic words and phrases.

Like Devil said, here comes PDF and CHS changing the subject again.

You are a liar. I did not say that, but this is what people of your ilk do-- twist and turn things around so that it matches the 'label' you wish to apply to someone.

I've posted crime data before and see nothing wrong with that. You don't like what the FBI's crime data says, tough.

Compared to Margaret Sanger, yeah, Trump is "off color". I know you guys like to throw terms like Hitler around casually, but I for one of the mind that genocide is a pretty serious thing.

I'm not trying justify anyone's behavior. If "off color" isn't a strong enough term, than ok, Trumps a racist [censored], of the highest Klan order. Happy? As far as me justifying voting for him, why bother? According to enough of you guys on here, I'm a racist white cop, the reasons should be self evident.

What I'm curious to know is why a population that says they are oppressed, etc supported in large numbers, and continues to support, in large numbers, a party that produces candidates like Hillary.

I get that not every candidate is going to perfectly align with a voters views and concerns 100%. But we're not talking about a candidate who you think is great on gun control but crap on taxes. We're talking about someone who is influenced by a woman who views them as sub-human.

I just think that would be a pretty big hurdle to overcome and was curious about the thought process.