Trump versus Biden Scorecard.

[LeftyGunner]

Yup. Still fits

View attachment 271202

What an insightful addition to the conversation, and definitely, totally not intended as a personal attack.

But I’m the troll?



Edit to add: Leading by example? When all else fails, use your staff position to make personal attacks on dissenting posters under the implied threat of the ban hammer.

Keep it classy INGO.

 

[KG1]

Yup. Still fits

View attachment 271202

Funny way to dig up clams.

 

[d.kaufman]

What an insightful addition to the conversation, and definitely, totally not intended as a personal attack.

But I’m the troll?

Did I ever call you a troll? Please find where I've said that. Did I quote your post? Nope.
My post is intended for EVERYONE that still thinks this country is better off now and would consider voting for Bidet again, not just you.

Edit to add. Where did I ever threaten you with a ban. Come on... show your work

 

[DoggyDaddy]

What is better about life under the Biden Administration?

From my perspective the biggest benefit is removal of Trump from the presidency.

For me its a character thing…Biden is old, failing, and compromised, but Trump is narcissistic, stupid, and malicious.

When forced to choose I’d still take the compromised has-been over the malicious wannabe, and I’ll still be holding my nose when I do it.

So it really just does come down to "Orange Man Bad"? While I wish Trump could be more "polished" in some ways (I think he shoots himself in the foot with some of his tweets), I don't care about that. I'm results-oriented, and he got results, and more quickly than any president in recent memory. And he got results while battling all the BS Russian crap, and 2 impeachments.

I say let that dog off the leash and let's see what can be implemented with a willing congress. But getting the willing congress will be an issue.

 

[LeftyGunner]

Did I ever call you a troll? Please find where I've said that. Did I quote your post? Nope.
My post is intended for EVERYONE that still thinks this country is better off now and would consider voting for Bidet again, not just you.

Edit to add. Where did I ever threaten you with a ban. Come on... show your work

Sure…that was meant for all the other admitted Biden voters here…the ones who aren’t banned.

Speaking of which…Show me you don‘t know the meaning of “implied” without telling me.

 

[Cameramonkey]

What an insightful addition to the conversation, and definitely, totally not intended as a personal attack.

But I’m the troll?



Edit to add: Leading by example? When all else fails, use your staff position to make personal attacks on dissenting posters under the implied threat of the ban hammer.

Keep it classy INGO.

There are no threats, express or implied in that post. Not with this mod crew.

It may have been that way years ago under the old guard, but they are all LONG gone.

And I don't know about any of the other mods, but I refuse to mod in a thread I'm participating in that might get spicy. If I'm in a debate, I refuse to take any serious mod actions in the same thread. I'll leave it up to other mods to take any action if necessary. Its only fair and prevents taking actions in a biased way. (But i believe we all take that approach)

 

[KG1]

Okay…in order to address this with some amount of intellectual honesty I had to take a break from the thread for a bit. My adrenaline was getting going, and that tends to put me in a “score points” frame of mind rather than one geared toward dispassionate debate.

I’m having a hard time addressing the specific points in the video because I am having a hard time identifying the specific points in the video. That’s why I keep saying it’s just rage bait, because it isn’t really effective at communicating specific points to address.

I have now watched that video from beginning to end at least a dozen times and, without snark or subtext, here are the specific points I think the video wishes to communicate:

Point 1: Biden foreign policy sucks.

Point 2: Biden lies.

Point 3: Biden‘s International image is embarrassing.

Point 4: Biden’s leadership has led to a collapse of American global influence, specifically in regards to
China, India, Japan, and France.

All of which suppose to conclude with the real point of the video:

Point 5: Trump’s leadership would have avoided all of the above.

So, my take?

The first three points are fair, but bathed in hyperbole.

Point 4 is more hyperbolic than the first three (I mean, France…really?), and I won’t lay full responsibility at Biden’s feet alone. Don’t get me wrong here, I’m not absolving him of his part…I just think this is way bigger than the current president or his administration.

That leads to point 5.

Simply put, I disagree. Trump fails on all four of the supporting points badly...as badly or worse than Biden…in my humble, biased opinion, of course.

So can you conclude that under Trump's leadership it led to a collapse of global ties and influence and the threat of the US global currency standard tanking under his watch? All of these things are happening under Biden's watch therefore he owns it IMO. When have once strategic allies turned toward China under Trump's watch? All of these points were made in the video.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

So can you conclude that under Trump's leadership it led to a collapse of global ties and influence and the threat of the US global currency standard tanking under his watch? All of these things are happening under Biden's watch therefore he owns it IMO. When have once strategic allies turned toward China under Trump's watch? All of these points were made in the video.

 

[BugI02]

Edit to add: Leading by example? When all else fails, use your staff position to make personal attacks on dissenting posters under the implied threat of the ban hammer.

If an INGO mod wished to threaten you with the hammer I believe it would NOT be implied, it would be overt

Haven't been there lately myself, but I believe that overt promise of chastisement would come after an attempt at rational discourse via DM. If you have followed the shooter thread, you know that is the usual pattern

Mods being members and people too, they are allowed to have and express their opinions, yes? I have disagreed with GFGT once or twice since he achieved modhood and he has been the soul of discretion, as has Mr Kaufmann I might add. If I stepped over a line I am certain they would tell me so in a non-public way and further action would only be required if I was disinclined to listen. The INGO mods have the authority but are mostly loath to use it. I believe they want to be just regular people when their super powers are not needed

You're in the weeds

 

[KG1]

Who was the one that directly got in China's face? Hint: it wasn't Biden. Whose family headed up by the 'BIG Guy." sought to profit/ did from pedaling influence to the CCCP? Whose family sought to profit/ did from back door energy contracts that benefited Burisma and thus the Biden family facilitated by the "Big Guy?" is that proper foreign policy that benefits the US? I think not

 

[LeftyGunner]

If an INGO mod wished to threaten you with the hammer I believe it would NOT be implied, it would be overt

Haven't been there lately myself, but I believe that overt promise of chastisement would come after an attempt at rational discourse via DM. If you have followed the shooter thread, you know that is the usual pattern

Mods being members and people too, they are allowed to have and express their opinions, yes? I have disagreed with GFGT once or twice since he achieved modhood and he has been the soul of discretion, as has Mr Kaufmann I might add. If I stepped over a line I am certain they would tell me so in a non-public way and further action would only be required if I was disinclined to listen. The INGO mods have the authority but are mostly loath to use it. I believe they want to be just regular people when their super powers are not needed

You're in the weeds

Perhaps you are right, as the person with the differing opinion perhaps I should expect to receive the odd personal swipe or two, give the benefit of the doubt, and be more gracious with my response.

Edit: lol, that aged well...keepin‘ it classy, INGO stye tonight!!!

 

[LeftyGunner]

So, I got this DM from @KellyinAvon:

(edited to add that I reported the post that I saw as a personal attack from a staff member, I am assuming this is the official staff response to my report.)

”
Hello! I'm KellyinAvon, senior staff member at INGO, moderator, 2A advocate, all around nice guy.

First off, I'm rejecting your report. My counterpart here on the staff whose post you reported (who has been here for 10 years and has over 13K posts) posted a gif in a thread. It was not a reply to your post (which was quite pithy even by INGO standards) yet you took offense. Why is that? “

That’s a question, so I’ll reply:

The answer is because it was a reply to me, twice. If you have an ounce of integrity you have to admit as much. I took offense to it because it was intended to offend me, rather than address the point(s) on discussion.

The message continues:

“With that said, looking at your username, location, and past posts (I have the feeling if you're part of the 11% of the population who is a Southpaw? That is a coincidence.) you very well know you won't be greeted warmly by most of the regulars here. “

Is that true ? Only 11%? I honestly thought there were more of us. Explains the lack of green handled scissors at the library.

I don’t expect to be greeted warmly. I expect my arguments to absolutely shredded here…but I expect to be treated with respect personally while I’m engaging here.

That gif was a personal attack, minor…certainly, but personal no less. It looks bad from another user, but from a moderator it comes with additional implications.

Again, if you have a shred of integrity you’ll admit this, as well.

Again, he continues:

“You will notice, you are free to post here within the rules of the site. How long would I be on a site of the Mad Moms or Everytown? The answer is, "not long." Pro 2A folk on the Interwebz have pretty thick skins.

Please note replies are locked on this PM. That's because this is not a discussion, it's a PM from a staff member. In other words, I think we're done here.

KiA”

Kelly, that went from “we have pretty thick skins here” to “you’re blocked, I win” really quickly…I don’t think this is the flex you see it as.

This is a discussion forum. Everything is a discussion here.

I get it..I ruffled your feathers and you are circling the wagons.

Ill take my ban in plain sight, thank you.

 

[KG1]

Looks like Kelly in Avon's integrity has been called into question. I'm afraid this will not end well.

 

[LeftyGunner]

Looks like Kelly in Avon's integrity has been called into question. I'm afraid this will not end well.

I know Kelly IRL, I’m honestly shocked by this DM.

Our next conversation is going to be an awkward one for me.

 

[KG1]

I know Kelly IRL, I’m honestly shocked by this DM.

Our next conversation is going to be an awkward one for me.

Yeah. I think I should reserve my coments any futher. This is none of my business really. It's between you and Kelly. Speaking on my part I've always for the most part tried to engage with you without any personal animus. I may have slipped a time or two as I belive that you have as well. Anyway, whatever happens I wish you no ill will.

 

[LeftyGunner]

So it really just does come down to "Orange Man Bad"? While I wish Trump could be more "polished" in some ways (I think he shoots himself in the foot with some of his tweets), I don't care about that. I'm results-oriented, and he got results, and more quickly than any president in recent memory. And he got results while battling all the BS Russian crap, and 2 impeachments.

I say let that dog off the leash and let's see what can be implemented with a willing congress. But getting the willing congress will be an issue.

I understand your point, and it’s totally reasonable: you like his results, the rest is secondary.

From a results standpoint, I disagree with large swaths of Trump’s agenda and resulting pen-and-phone accomplishments, so there isn’t a large upside there.

Couple with that, for me, the character of the candidate matters, and Trump has repeatedly shown he is a man of poor character.

If it goes Trump v Biden in 2024 I’ll hold my nose and vote Biden again. I would prefer two different choices altogether.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

@LeftyGunner PMs are private messages for a reason. This won’t win you any points and doing tricks like this have gotten people time outs before. You might want to reconsider your actions.

 

[LeftyGunner]

Yeah. I think I should reserve my coments any futher. This is none of my business really. It's between you and Kelly. Speaking on my part I've always for the most part tried to engage with you without any personal animus. I may have slipped a time or two as I belive that you have as well. Anyway, whatever happens I wish you no ill will.

Yeah, for my part, I totally recognize that. You, chip, Jamil, the guy with the funky Mount Rushmore avatar…I really look forward to what some of you have to say in this forum. It’s insight I don’t get from my own algorithm inspired echo chambers.

I really appreciate the ones that have engaged in good faith...it’s what keeps me coming back.

 

[KG1]

Heathy dialog is a rare commodity these days unfortunately Would that it could be point/counterpoint w/out dusting it with a dash of personal spice.

 

[KellyinAvon]

So, I got this DM from @KellyinAvon:

(edited to add that I reported the post that I saw as a personal attack from a staff member, I am assuming this is the official staff response to my report.)

”
Hello! I'm KellyinAvon, senior staff member at INGO, moderator, 2A advocate, all around nice guy.

First off, I'm rejecting your report. My counterpart here on the staff whose post you reported (who has been here for 10 years and has over 13K posts) posted a gif in a thread. It was not a reply to your post (which was quite pithy even by INGO standards) yet you took offense. Why is that? “

That’s a question, so I’ll reply:

The answer is because it was a reply to me, twice. If you have an ounce of integrity you have to admit as much. I took offense to it because it was intended to offend me, rather than address the point(s) on discussion.

The message continues:

“With that said, looking at your username, location, and past posts (I have the feeling if you're part of the 11% of the population who is a Southpaw? That is a coincidence.) you very well know you won't be greeted warmly by most of the regulars here. “

Is that true ? Only 11%? I honestly thought there were more of us. Explains the lack of green handled scissors at the library.

I don’t expect to be greeted warmly. I expect my arguments to absolutely shredded here…but I expect to be treated with respect personally while I’m engaging here.

That gif was a personal attack, minor…certainly, but personal no less. It looks bad from another user, but from a moderator it comes with additional implications.

Again, if you have a shred of integrity you’ll admit this, as well.

Again, he continues:

“You will notice, you are free to post here within the rules of the site. How long would I be on a site of the Mad Moms or Everytown? The answer is, "not long." Pro 2A folk on the Interwebz have pretty thick skins.

Please note replies are locked on this PM. That's because this is not a discussion, it's a PM from a staff member. In other words, I think we're done here.

KiA”

Kelly, that went from “we have pretty thick skins here” to “you’re blocked, I win” really quickly…I don’t think this is the flex you see it as.

This is a discussion forum. Everything is a discussion here.

I get it..I ruffled your feathers and you are circling the wagons.

Ill take my ban in plain sight, thank you.

To quote our Emeritus Moderator and good friend of mine Churchmouse, and Humble Pie...