Trump 2024 ???

[jamil]

I submit that you decided not Trump long before there was (to you) a viable alternative and then latched onto someone you can justify to yourself as a better bet. One came long before the other and to paint it as some kind of carefully reasoned choice is retconning at its finest

Here's what you got correct. I have decided long ago that I'd prefer not to vote for Trump. It was after the 2020 election, when Trump attempted the whole Pence coercion/delegate slate thing. To me, that makes him less fit for the office, IMO. You'll undoubtedly be offended by that. It's not that I don't think you get to disagree. That's why they call them opinions.

What you got wrong is that I have latched onto anyone. Maybe you're projecting a mirror image of yourself onto me that you can attack whenever I might say something critical of Trump. But you keep getting it wrong. I'm not wired like you are. I do not believe I owe any politician veneration, adoration, or loyalty. I automatically distrust anyone who WANTS to be in charge of things. Trump wants to be POTUS. I don't trust him. DeSantis wants to be president. I don't trust him. It's as simple as that.

And I understand that this is not how you're wired. You feel a sense of loyalty. I get that. But I think that loyalty tends to make you less critical than Trump deserves. And I think it tends to make you more critical of DeSantis, because he's the opposition. Can you prove that not true?

Also, the specious attempts to make disagreements with a viewpoint you are so anxious to showcase into some questionable personal obsession is a page right out of Kut's playbook, and it doesn't work any better when you do it and probably not even as well

Questionable personal obsession? Dude, you do this **** all the time. And I'll admit that I give it right back in abundance. I don't know what Kut's playbook is. Mine is, you get what you give. If you give me snark, maybe I'll give you some benefit of doubt before I give it right back. If you're respectful to me, I'll be respectful to you. But the benefit of doubt is long past.

As a leading, or at least highly verbose, proponent of anybody but Trump you and I are destined to clash most anywhere you wish to proselytize for your worldview, no need to drag Alinsky-style stratagems into it

I think you misunderstand. It's not as much that I'm a proponent of anyone but Trump. I do state my opinions about the guy. It's THAT I state my opinions in the presence of an ardent Trump fan, who can't handle any well supported criticism of him. I'm not talking about just me. You go out of your way to make an enemy of anyone who expresses any kind of disdain for Trump. The problem, you lead with snark. And that's why you get it right back, by more than just me.

It doesn't need to be adversarial. I have respectful discussions with others who have an opposite point of view from me. You and I could have a respectful conversation about it. It's not me that chooses not to. And if you don't believe me. Give it a go. Try leading with respect. See how I respond. Prove me wrong.

To flip your script, you don't like that I still think Trump is the best bet and that hits a nerve for you. You remind me of a downstream echo of TLex, always asking 'Isn't what Trump has done now enough to change your mind? If not, what will it take'

And you're wrong again. That's not the script. I don't mind at all that you think Trump is the best bet. But if you throw shade at me because I don't, and am vocal about it, well. You know.

I'll tell you what. If it comes down to the end of the Primaries and he's the one left standing to face the democrats, he will be the best and only available bet. I don't know how much more clear I can make it than that. I have as much right to have a negative perspective towards Trump as you have to have a positive one. I don't get butthurt because you like him. Maybe you could reciprocate and we'd not bore INGO with these spats.

In case you haven't gotten it by now, I don't care if you like Trump. You're welcome to think as highly of him as you want to think. But commenting on that is fair game. Meaning, if I see what I think are irrational arguments, or I think you're acting disingenuously, that's going to become part of the conversation. Whatever snark accompanies it, is up to you.

 

[jamil]

Now do blanc cheque support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine

There's a topic where I think we agree.

 

[jamil]

I know you are trying to feign intelligence with your faux Eurospeak, which is hilarious in its irony, given widespread European support for Ukraine. But for future reference, it's "chèque en blanc."

 

[BugI02]

This part of the conversation started with me saying this:


The point of course, is that you want to view the world through a perspective where Trump is never wrong, and you are never wrong in how you perceive him. And we got into this grey vs colored, sunglasses thing. And then ND filters.

Continuing the analogy I said this:


If you want to see the world naturally colored, you'd want your sunglasses to use as neutral grey as you can get. But you then tried to twist the metaphor to imply that my preferred choice to see the world as it is, was dull. That was an attempt to deflect the whole point of the metaphor. And I didn't let you. I kept it on point, that you're viewing the world through a tinted lens. And you have not denied that.


When I was into photography I did mostly outdoor photography. I used ND filters a lot. Polarizing filter was a necessity on sunny days. I used some color tints on flowers and stuff. But

I've never seen a teal filter. That was a joke, and part of the metaphor, that you're seeing the world through a tint of your own choosing. You keep claiming I have beliefs I don't hold. And I keep pointing out where you're wrong. Take the tinted glasses off and see for yourself.

For someone who considers his viewpoint, on anything, to always be correct, you certainly are more than willing to declare other viewpoints to be wrong simply because they are not in agreement with yours

Deine Wahrheit über die Wahrheit

I think I can see why you feel so able to diagnose narcissism in Trump

 

[BugI02]

You can't just admit that, even though he's done some good or even great things, he screwed the pooch on that one

Because we have no expectation that it will ever be enough for you and your fellow travelers

After all, you're still on about things he did 20 years ago - while of course waving off things DeRomneyis did when he was a congressman as ancient history or alibiing it

Seeing you as the spiritual child of TLex vis a vis Trump was an epiphany

 

[Twangbanger]

Because we have no expectation that it will ever be enough for you and your fellow travelers

After all, you're still on about things he did 20 years ago - while of course waving off things DeRomneyis did when he was a congressman as ancient history or alibiing it

Seeing you as the spiritual child of TLex vis a vis Trump was an epiphany

That last crack is way off-mark. TLex said he'd never vote for Trump before the 2016 primaries even reached SooperToozday, then thankfully disappeared when the world didn't comply. Jamil is on record as having voted for him twice. You're acting like b'zilla in the Nashville-antidepressant sh.tshow.

 

[BugI02]

You don't act like you believe that. Bumpstocks ban, warp speed, etcetera, if it were not Trump you'd be right there condemning that. You can still favor Trump because you think the good outweighs the bad. You don't show any evidence that you think there is any bad because you dig so hard for reasons to excuse it.

Perhaps if you conducted yourself less like an inquisitor and every discussion about Trump less like it was a struggle session where the goal is to get the heretic to admit his guilt/error you would see greater results

You were anybody but Trump no later than early 2016. Voting for him because all your other choices were left bleeding on the field does you no credit

We were endlessly lectured about Trump's imagined flaws even then, but we could not be swayed because we wanted to take a chance on something different. Then when he turned out to be a surprisingly good president considering he was such a longshot, you grudgingly damned him with faint praises while always scanning for any flaws you could seize upon

Maybe if you had sent him some help in congress in 2016 he could have gotten a great deal more done, but you can't even admit to yourself that DeSantis will be in the same boat and so far has not demonstrated that he has any more chops than Trump - and we are in the same boat with respect to his candidacy. He's a longshot because saving the country is much more of a longshot now and he has only demonstrated that he can do well in a very republican pond.

Thus, I feel perfectly at liberty to view everything about your boy through suspicious eyes and praise him only grudgingly when he does something useful. I learned that from you

 

[jamil]

For someone who considers his viewpoint, on anything, to always be correct, you certainly are more than willing to declare other viewpoints to be wrong simply because they are not in agreement with yours

Deine Wahrheit über die Wahrheit

I think I can see why you feel so able to diagnose narcissism in Trump

Still not getting it. Do you say stuff that you think is wrong? Why would you do that? Of course I think I'm right. But, I recognize it's my opinion. You have yours. I have mine. Are you really arguing that? Or do you think that you don't argue against viewpoints you disagree with?

 

[KG1]

This is all binary.

 

[BugI02]

I know you are trying to feign intelligence with your faux Eurospeak, which is hilarious in its irony, given widespread European support for Ukraine. But for future reference, it's "chèque en blanc."

Oh, snap! If anyone would be equipped to recognize feigned intelligence it would certainly be you

"The competition is so vicious only because the rewards are so small"

I will SO try to do better next time [:crossed fingers emoji:]

 

[KG1]

This is all bilingual.

 

[jamil]

Because we have no expectation that it will ever be enough for you and your fellow travelers

You keep saying stuff and I keep being astonished how you missed so wide.

My point was not that I'm patiently waiting for you to admit that Trump isn't god. My point was that it's possible to acknowledge all the things that are good and bad about someone you support. It's actually healthy to do so.

For example, instead concocting complicated scenarios for why Trump didn't screw the pooch on bumpstocks when someone challenges you with something objectively true, you could say, eh. Yeah. Okay. He ****ed that up. I wish he hadn't done that. But I have to take the bad with the good on balance. I have no problem with that at all. But when you start making up wild ass explanations, I guess to preserve Trump's image, It makes people, including me, think it's more about a cult of personality than it is about saying what's true and what's not true.

After all, you're still on about things he did 20 years ago - while of course waving off things DeRomneyis did when he was a congressman as ancient history or alibiing it

Is that act not still relevant today? If you keep your pecker in your pants and honor your vows, you won't have those slings and arrows the rest of your life. For his 12 seconds of pleasure, he's had to pay a lot more than the cost of admission. The more ****ups you have, the more will come back to haunt you.

Seeing you as the spiritual child of TLex vis a vis Trump was an epiphany

You should take off those teal colored glasses. It's causing delusions.

 

[BugI02]

I have as much right to have a negative perspective towards Trump as you have to have a positive one

I'm having a tough time detecting the part where you are acknowledging my right to have a positive opinion of him

But it is nice to know I have dispensation

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[Ziggidy]

I'll tell you what. If it comes down to the end of the Primaries and he's the one left standing to face the democrats, he will be the best and only available bet.

I would think and hope that would be true for the majority of people.

Voting for the best “in front of us”.

 

[jamil]

Perhaps if you conducted yourself less like an inquisitor and every discussion about Trump less like it was a struggle session where the goal is to get the heretic to admit his guilt/error you would see greater results

I am not confident you know what a discussion on disagreeing points even looks like. It bit you in the ass and you still don't know. You don't even address points. You blather hyperbole.

You were anybody but Trump no later than early 2016. Voting for him because all your other choices were left bleeding on the field does you no credit

Yes. I was not a fan of Trump since 2015 when he first entered the race. I remember the speech in Alabama. I thought. Nope. That guy is pandering. And he was. And I'm still not a fan.

We were endlessly lectured about Trump's imagined flaws even then

Imagined flaws? They're apparent to people who aren't ideologically possessed.

, but we could not be swayed because we wanted to take a chance on something different. Then when he turned out to be a surprisingly good president considering he was such a longshot, you grudgingly damned him with faint praises while always scanning for any flaws you could seize upon

Trump had a good presidency overall, especially given the hyperbole thrown at him dialed to 11. During his term I gave him praise for doing what I thought were the right things, and I criticized him for doing I thought were the wrong things. That's what normal people do. Normal people don't have such fierce loyalty to a politician, to the point they deny any wrongdoing in the face of evidence. They don't make up complicated excuses for the things they can't explain. They don't foist their idols up on pedestals.

Maybe if you had sent him some help in congress in 2016

What? Me? I am responsible for who Indiana sends to Washington now, regardless of how I voted? That's some ****ed up groupthink.

he could have gotten a great deal more done, but you can't even admit to yourself that DeSantis will be in the same boat and so far has not demonstrated that he has any more chops than Trump - and we are in the same boat with respect to his candidacy. He's a longshot because saving the country is much more of a longshot now and he has only demonstrated that he can do well in a very republican pond.

Why is this about DeSantis? I've said some positive things about him. I've said some negative things about him. I think you think I'm supposed to think like you do. I am not supporting DeSantis at this time. I'm watching what he says and does. We'll see. I think he does have a better political skillset than Trump does.

Thus, I feel perfectly at liberty to view everything about your boy through suspicious eyes and praise him only grudgingly when he does something useful. I learned that from you

Now I think you're just calling him my boy out of snark. I don't have a candidate that I'm currently supporting. I know about Trump. I don't know enough about DeSantis. Juries out. But you can keep making a fool of yourself with this line of thinking. I don't mind.

And if you had learned anything from me, we wouldn't clash so much. You've only learned from the caricature you've built to cope with not having an actual answer to the criticisms I and others have made about Trump. You don't seem to mind when we praise him. You certainly can't handle it when we criticism him. You lash out. You didn't learn that from me. It came from you.

 

[jamil]

I would think and hope that would be true for the majority of people.

Voting for the best “in front of us”.

I'm not convinced he's the best in front of us in the primaries, or that if he wins he's the best we could have. But when it comes to the general election, if you're voting D, I think this country isn't going to make it. NPR Republicans might not think so. I just don't see much of a way past this. I hope that's just a failure of my imagination.

 

[jamil]

I've said it before. I think the indictment will help Trump win the primary. I think it will solidify and energize Trump's base. That should pay dividends in the primaries.

But I'm not sure it will help him win the general election. It's only going to help him with people who could vote for him. But for Democrats, it's going to really help the army of purple hair gender fluid vote harvesters to get apathetic young adults to vote against Trump. "Are you gonna let that felon be president again? Vote NO against the felon president."

 

[KG1]

I think the point of friction for Trump supporters is this. Prodding them to acknowledge the faults when they are overwhelmingly pleased with the good is counterintuitive for them to do so and they resent the pressure.

 

[BugI02]

I disagree. For me the friction is primarily generated by one of two mechanisms

1) Starting every discussion from the standpoint that one is right because one has oh so carefully weighed all the possibilities and come to a conclusion based on dispassionate analysis of the facts. It's bull**** and it is infuriating because it it what leftists do. As I've said before, if that was true he wouldn't have to work so hard to sell the idea

2) Trying to play Socrates and 'teach' the unwashed masses what you have concluded they need to learn. This is also bull****, and ignores the fact that for the Socratic method to be effective the student must accept the teacher as having something worthy of learning