|
|
Post by elaine on Apr 14, 2017 22:02:07 GMT
I swear that political threads are so. much. more. intellectually. satisfying since I put Gia on ignore in February.
I haven't even peeked once. There is absolutely no need.
I highly recommend it.
|
|
|
|
Post by redhead32 on Apr 14, 2017 22:23:38 GMT
It just seems to me that when you (general) debate with intelligent people who have different views it informs and elevates you. When you argue with someone who is basically unhinged and repetitious beyond belief it just drags you and the entire discussion down. What is the point of allowing yourself to be manipulated into going over the same ground ad nauseam? Is there a point or an end goal? It bugs me when someone tells me not to engage. I sit on my hands and don't respond more often than I do respond. My knee jerk reaction to your post was that I'll say what I want, like everyone else on this board. I guess my inner masochist is waiting for that ONE TIME that I hear, "You know, you might be right. I hadn't thought about it like that before." I also root for the underdog in movies, political races, and sporting events. :-P |
|
|
|
Post by redhead32 on Apr 14, 2017 22:26:41 GMT
Honestly, every political thread follows the same basic formula:
Post about something Trump has done (tweet, bombing, idiotic press conference, horrid budget proposal, lack of understanding of basic politics, etc.)
Followup posts of people analyzing and discussing but at this point we don't have a lot left to say. (This is my favorite part because it is where I generally learn something that I didn't know).
Post by "conservatives" that talk about Obama or Hillary.
Followup by a changing cast of regulars who try to reason with the "but Obama/Hillary" comparison.
Trainwreck.
Repeat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 14, 2017 22:33:17 GMT
I swear that political threads are so. much. more. intellectually. satisfying since I put Gia on ignore in February. I haven't even peeked once. There is absolutely no need. I highly recommend it. I really wish the ignore feature worked on Tapatalk. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:44:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2017 23:15:19 GMT
It just seems to me that when you (general) debate with intelligent people who have different views it informs and elevates you. When you argue with someone who is basically unhinged and repetitious beyond belief it just drags you and the entire discussion down. What is the point of allowing yourself to be manipulated into going over the same ground ad nauseam? Is there a point or an end goal? It bugs me when someone tells me not to engage. I sit on my hands and don't respond more often than I do respond. My knee jerk reaction to your post was that I'll say what I want, like everyone else on this board. I guess my inner masochist is waiting for that ONE TIME that I hear, "You know, you might be right. I hadn't thought about it like that before." I also root for the underdog in movies, political races, and sporting events. :-P You know, I guess that's what I'm waiting to hear too. That someone, anyone, would say "I hadn't thought of that before, but yeah" or "I strongly disagree, but I see why you think that." Or at the very least "I completely disagree, but I respect your right to say what you think." The point about Hillary/Obama not being relevant falls flat when there has never been a time when ANYTHING negative, even facts, have been allowed to stand here. Even the time when it was our job as voters to compare the candidates, there were plenty of others besides me, trying to do that and they were all silenced with personal attacks and things just like this now. EVERYTHING negative was dismissed in some form or another and when anyone would back it up with facts they were piled on like this. Just goes to show, the truth is, its not about hillary/Obama not being relevant, it's about not allowing differing viewpoints here. Thats why there were so many others saying what I'm saying now and some either left or just don't partipate anymore. So it's not just me. But, if it makes you feel superior to those with a different viewpoint to silence them and call them crazy for voicing their opinion and FACTS, or for you to go along in agreement with doing that, rather than allowing differing viewpoints to stand, then that says a hell of a lot more about you than it does me. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:44:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2017 23:27:25 GMT
There are so many views we don't hear on this message board because people are afraid of being treated like this. There are so many discussions not being had here, because people are afraid of being treated like this.
Thats why it's such an echo chamber here with the only people talking are all in agreement. There's only lukewarm disagreement on ever so slight differences in thought.
|
|
lbrock44
Junior Member
Posts: 73 
|
Post by lbrock44 on Apr 14, 2017 23:39:23 GMT
Why do you keep saying Hillary/Obama? Aside from the fact that if Hillary were president right now we wouldn't be in this shitstorm of a mess, Hillary wasn't Obama's running mate, Obama wasn't Hillary's; they are two separate people with different policies. The fact that you keep on bringing up Hillary is disconcerting.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:44:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2017 23:44:45 GMT
Why do you keep saying Hillary/Obama? Aside from the fact that if Hillary were president right now we wouldn't be in this shitstorm of a mess, Hillary wasn't Obama's running mate, Obama wasn't Hillary's; they are two separate people with different policies. The fact that you keep on bringing up Hillary is disconcerting. It's nothing more than shorthand for discussing Hillary and discussing Obama. |
|
|
|
Post by 950nancy on Apr 14, 2017 23:44:47 GMT
Except they are in no way "comparable". And you saying they are, in no way equates them. 2 Presidents showing their clueless moments. One repeatedly says "Who knew ______ was so complicated." The other repeatedly says, "I didn't know about ______, I only found out in the news the same time as the general public." Sounds comparable to me. Just because Trump is more of a buffoon and more often clueless (among many other things) doesn't make these clueless moments any less comparable. For me, the difference is that Trump bragged repeatedly through his campaign that he was so smart. He bragged that healthcare would be fixed quickly. It was easy. He knew more than the generals about war. I don't see them as at comparable. One was a humble man who appeared to do his best for the country. The other seems to be out for what is best for his family and screw the little people. |
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Apr 15, 2017 0:39:08 GMT
I swear that political threads are so. much. more. intellectually. satisfying since I put Gia on ignore in February. I haven't even peeked once. There is absolutely no need. I highly recommend it. I really wish the ignore feature worked on Tapatalk. I'm sorry.  It even blocks out when people quote the blocked person, so no accidental reading. I wish for everyone'S sake it worked with Tapatalk too. |
|
twinsmomfla99
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,248
|
Post by twinsmomfla99 on Apr 15, 2017 0:41:52 GMT
I don't want to put Gia on ignore. I don't usually agree with her, but I appreciate hearing her point of view. I think we have been able to disagree most of the time without getting personal. There have been times when she has challenged me to see a point of view I had not previously considered, although not on anything Trump-related.
But then, I don't think anything less than a voice coming from a burning bush would change my mind about Trump at this point. I tried to keep an open mind after the election. I did not post a single negative thing about him on Facebook and for the most part on here, even as his transition team was filled with swamp-dwellers. I gave him the benefit of the doubt as long as I could, but DeVos and the continuous revelations about the Russian connections did me in. That and the continued conflicts of interest, the outright lies by him and his staff, the ridiculous security costs, all that twitter nonsense ....it all showed just how little respect he has for his office and how little he knows about governing. Now he has dug a hole so deep that I can't imagine any action he could take that would allow me to respect him or have any trust in his ability to make choices in the best interests of our country rather than the best interests of Donald Trump and his cronies.
Gia is a smart woman, and she can hold her own around here. No matter how much she frustrates me about her views on Trump/Obama/Hilary, it is never a bad thing when someone makes you do your research to support your point. I can think of at least three times this week alone that I planned to respond to a point she or another pea made and changed my mind or at least rewrote my post based on research I did before posting. I know that if I'm wrong, she will call me on it and back it up with her own research.
Opposing voices keep us intellectually honest, and we should all consider the value in that when we engage with others online.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:44:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017 1:13:14 GMT
There are so many views we don't hear on this message board because people are afraid of being treated like this. There are so many discussions not being had here, because people are afraid of being treated like this. Thats why it's such an echo chamber here with the only people talking are all in agreement. There's only lukewarm disagreement on ever so slight differences in thought. Problem is what you call a viewpoint is really a tit for tat which adds nothing to any conversation. There is a difference as these two definitions show. "Tit for tat is an English expression that is used to refer to "retaliation in kind", or more broadly, for any "equivalent [to an action] given in return."[1] It is thought to have evolved from the earlier expression, "tip for tap," where the connotation of "tip" is "blow", as in to strike physically (e.g., as in "blow for blow"); its reported first appearance was in 1556.[1]" Trump did this and the response is President Obama did it to. Do you see the "retaliation in kind"? Viewpoint - To talk about a person's individual attitude about things. Example - Conflicts in politics come up due to differing viewpoints on issues like taxes, welfare, and defense. When one makes a statement like " President Obama was not in the situation room during the Benghazi attack" that can be seen as a "fact" or a specific action committed by President Obama. But not a viewpoint. A comment like " I think the bill trump signed this week on Planned Parenthood sucks" is a viewpoint. The majority of threads involving trump have been about a specific action that he has taken or something he said. Dry few about actual issues. While I don't read every single post of yours the consistent response from you has been "well so and so did it as well." What is missing, unless you get really pushed, is if you agree or disagree with his action or words. Then the posting equivalent of a mumble appears that you don't agree with what he did. Then you go off on how other's views aren't welcome blah blah blah. You complain about how others treat you but it appears you are your own worst enemy. Or to look at it another way, you keep shooting yourself in the foot. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 21:44:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2017 2:44:16 GMT
I don't want to put Gia on ignore. I don't usually agree with her, but I appreciate hearing her point of view. I think we have been able to disagree most of the time without getting personal. There have been times when she has challenged me to see a point of view I had not previously considered, although not on anything Trump-related. But then, I don't think anything less than a voice coming from a burning bush would change my mind about Trump at this point. I tried to keep an open mind after the election. I did not post a single negative thing about him on Facebook and for the most part on here, even as his transition team was filled with swamp-dwellers. I gave him the benefit of the doubt as long as I could, but DeVos and the continuous revelations about the Russian connections did me in. That and the continued conflicts of interest, the outright lies by him and his staff, the ridiculous security costs, all that twitter nonsense ....it all showed just how little respect he has for his office and how little he knows about governing. Now he has dug a hole so deep that I can't imagine any action he could take that would allow me to respect him or have any trust in his ability to make choices in the best interests of our country rather than the best interests of Donald Trump and his cronies. Gia is a smart woman, and she can hold her own around here. No matter how much she frustrates me about her views on Trump/Obama/Hilary, it is never a bad thing when someone makes you do your research to support your point. I can think of at least three times this week alone that I planned to respond to a point she or another pea made and changed my mind or at least rewrote my post based on research I did before posting. I know that if I'm wrong, she will call me on it and back it up with her own research. Opposing voices keep us intellectually honest, and we should all consider the value in that when we engage with others online. Thank you Twinsmom, I appreciate your words and point of view.  |
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Apr 15, 2017 2:47:22 GMT
you know what, Gia? we might appreciate your point of view, too, if you'd post it more often. Or post it without burying it in amongst all the other stuff. (no snark intended, at all. just to clarify.  ) |
|
|
|
Post by ScrapsontheRocks on Apr 15, 2017 4:52:57 GMT
It just seems to me that when you (general) debate with intelligent people who have different views it informs and elevates you. When you argue with someone who is basically unhinged and repetitious beyond belief it just drags you and the entire discussion down. What is the point of allowing yourself to be manipulated into going over the same ground ad nauseam? Is there a point or an end goal? It bugs me when someone tells me not to engage. I sit on my hands and don't respond more often than I do respond. My knee jerk reaction to your post was that I'll say what I want, like everyone else on this board. I guess my inner masochist is waiting for that ONE TIME that I hear, "You know, you might be right. I hadn't thought about it like that before." I also root for the underdog in movies, political races, and sporting events. :-P It is possible. If I have the correct pea in mind (no callouts here) I am glad to say on two different threads in the recent past we have exchanged views in a respectful manner. Nothing earth shattering, just normal political talk. There was nothing unequal/ underdog like on either side and no pain. Every board member is important to the mix; I grant we do tire each other out. For the sake of old friendships, tolerance and free speech, I just scroll on by sometimes. Often I learn something or sharpen my own thinking. |
|
It even blocks out when people quote the blocked person, so no accidental reading. I wish for everyone'S sake it worked with Tapatalk too. 
)