TRUMP - Some people think......... How do you feel?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Mystic said:
Many Republicans around here initially loved Trump's politically incorrect style, myself included, as an antidote to the standard insincere, packaged political leader who is the pawn of speech writers guided by focus groups. Trump is not a racist, but he is inarticulate, petty, immature, and frankly not very bright when it comes to damage control. Take his recent Charlottesville debacle. He was trying to make an important point, which would never have been made by Obama. Both the Alt-right and the Alt-left feel entitled to violence and property damage to make an impact. But the USA media is so anti-Trump that they prefer to wink at the Alt-left's anarchic violence. That should have been the most important take-away from Charlottesville. Trump needed to begin his initial comments by unequivocally naming and condemning the white supremicists and their anti-Semitic agenda. But instead he offered a vague condemnation of all bigotry and found fault "on all sides." thus demonstrating that he is not ready for prime time. Too bad because I, like most Americans around here, love many aspects of his unique approach, especially to international affairs. If only he would stop tweeting listen to his more sane advisors like Pence and Kelly!
Click to expand...
It's too bad that they voted for a political molotov cocktail instead of somebody without any moral ethics or human decency to speak of. Too bad they felt the need to. America has a lot of healing to do.

Maybe everyone should be forced into doing to a DNA test. That might awaken some people out of the glamour of "us vs them". In the end there is no "them", there is only "us", a house without division.
 
Neo said:
It's too bad that they voted for a political molotov cocktail instead of somebody without any moral ethics or human decency to speak of. Too bad they felt the need to. America has a lot of healing to do.

Maybe everyone should be forced into doing to a DNA test. That might awaken some people out of the glamour of "us vs them". In the end there is no "them", there is only "us", a house without division.
Click to expand...
I remember the MSM was also supporting 45 before he got elected?
Not all the MSM of course.
Too bad they felt the need to.
Too bad some Muslims felt the need to vote for 45.
And spanish.
And some in the flyover states. Working class who are ignored by elite on West and East coast of US.
And some African-Americans.
And so forth.

We have 2 choices: nuklear annhilation on 1 side and total destruction on the other
I hope we choose wisely :3
 
Places where you feel you are not going to be trolled and verbally/ emotionally abused for having "social justice views". That's what a safe space means to me. That's what it's come down to.

I remember being told here that I don't belong on the Internet - largely because I am a sensitive person - and at that time I really wasn't savvy to what trolling and s**t posting even were. I had no idea - but this particular aspect of the Internet started "owning" internet social culture and I wasn't aware. And you almost have to be able to match it to survive it, and it's kind of soul sucking. Hence, why I didn't belong. But I think it needs to change so that spaces for discussion are safer, and more just.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
I just want to put this out there...it's a year old, but this is why I do not like Scott Adams and won't bother to pay attention to his views or his buzzwords (he is a hypnotist/ master persuader - his buzzwords are red flags that he is "persuading" his audience):

How the creator of 'Dilbert' became the hero of the Trump subreddit | The Daily Dot
Click to expand...
*giggle* what a hit piece that doesnt make sense
Quoting twits who point a Dilbert strip that makes fun of SJWs...umm...thatz bad how?
Quotes fellow twit Alexandra Petri that she wants to read a comic page to escape...again, so what?
Then the writer gives one of Scott Adams posts as an example of many of his attacks on feminism and feminists...
Scott Adams' Blog ... my goodness, he must be Hitler for writing words...again it doesnt make sense...he allows himself to be wrong as well ("unless im blinded by confirmation bias")...the article is funny...

Then the writer calls Scott Adams an oracle? Wtf are they on?
Yes Scott Adams developed the hypothesis of a Master Persuader. That is part of what he does. He thrn tests thr hypothesis. Always. He comes up with multiple hypotheses.

Yes he did endorse Hillary for his personal safety. And he was right to do so. He did lose millions for just writing aboot how persuasion works and how he thinks Trump does his thing.

Adams has a loyal horde? Sounds like someone has a problem with themzelves.

Then the author says that a reddit /r/The Donald is an example of...what? Again?

Then the writer gives a pretty good rewording the Master Persuader Hypothesis but says that is part of the reason for Scott's fame...mind reading, now?

Then the writer writes why Scott says he is qualified. This is a logical fallacy attempt here. Just because one isnt a woman doesnt mean they cant write truthful or useful things aboot women. I have never read Scott saying he thinks he himself is a Master Persuader.

The next paragraph is a fact. That is how humans behave. We dont apply thr same way of thinking to our in group as we apply to our outgroup.

The next paragraph is garbled nonsense.

Then the writer goes in to how reddit has long flowed with men who believe feminism and feminists are baad 4 Americans...sooo...again this para doesnt make sense...

Thrn the next para tries to blame Scott for this. Umm...bizarre. and the links again bizarre.

The next para is again bizarre. The Scott article linked in the para does not even say what the author thinks he says. He has an observation and tries to come up with a hypothesis 4 it.


I can't go on. The piece is so bizarre. But I will defend the author's right to it.

Again, youve made up your mind, Kimmio. You could read a whole lot of his stuff and base your opinions on his words...or you can search the net for other peoples opinions on him...Truth or get rid of your fear and anxiety?

There is honest critique of SJWz
There is honest critique of Feminism and Feminists (not all Feminists r Feminists, not all Feminism is Feminism...). Not all Feminists have decent beliefs etc
There is honest critique of the Wage Gap
And so forth...

I'm guessing the latest reason for your anxiety over Scott Adams is in that last post of his, you've grouped him as a blasphemy because he attempted 2 show an unpopular view of 45's Saturday tweet on Charlottesville...
You've moralized him. And now you cant think heterosexually aboot him ('straight', get it?) :3

Again he offers hypotheses that he tests again and again accepting input from other people.

Do you?

Why not formulate multiple hypotheses here?

Then actually test them against reality.
 
Kimmio said:
Places where you feel you are not going to be trolled and verbally/ emotionally abused for having "social justice views". That's what a safe space means to me. That's what it's come down to.

I remember being told here that I don't belong on the Internet - largely because I am a sensitive person - and at that time I really wasn't savvy to what trolling and s**t posting even were. I had no idea - but this particular aspect of the Internet started "owning" internet social culture and I wasn't aware. And you almost have to be able to match it to survive it, and it's kind of soul sucking. Hence, why I didn't belong. But I think it needs to change so that spaces for discussion are safer, and more just.
Click to expand...
Dont understand yer first para.
I kinda grok yer 2nd... wasnt that when chansen suggested you dont go to Reddit? If so I understand that totally.
Problem is that how does one premake speech Just?
And what do you mean by spaces for discussion should be safer?
 
Inannawhimsey said:
Dont understand yer first para.
I kinda grok yer 2nd... wasnt that when chansen suggested you dont go to Reddit? If so I understand that totally.
Problem is that how does one premake speech Just?
And what do you mean by spaces for discussion should be safer?
Click to expand...
No it was a long time ago in a dust up far away.

I don't believe that certain povs deserve airtime - misogyny, racial superiority, ableism. SJW as deragotory (social Justice Warrior) was started by misogynists racists and ableists.

I wish some peoples' ideas had stayed in their heads or remained figments of imagination and artistic expression not materialized into real world problems. The world would be safer. And I wish it was. Not because we should need more authorities to protect us, but because we have developed enough forethought, common sense, compassion and conscience to keep ourselves and each other safe.

I don't believe spewing hateful threatening words in public spaces is a fundemental right. And the alt-right thinks it should be. And people who want to feel safe on the Internet are weak - and feelings are a weakness and nobody can "make" anybody feel anything. Which is bulls**t to those of us who are sensitive, who do get hurt by words.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
No it was a long time ago in a dust up far away.

I don't believe that certain povs deserve airtime - misogyny, racial superiority, ableism. SJW as deragotory (social Justice Warrior) was started by misogynists racists and ableists.

I wish some peoples' ideas had stayed in their heads or remained figments of imagination and artistic expression not materialized into real world problems. The world would be safer. And I wish it was. Not because we should need more authorities to protect us, because we have developed enough forethought, common sense, and conscience to keep ourselves and each other safe.

I don't believe spewing hateful threatening words in public spaces is a fundemental right.
Click to expand...

Ok. I understand that better. Ty for the clarification.

Do you agree that spewing hateful and like words in someones own home and property is a right?
 
Inannawhimsey said:
Ok. I understand that better. Ty for the clarification.

Do you agree that spewing hateful and likr words in someones own home and property is a fundamental right?
Click to expand...
i don't think it's a good thing to do - but to police it is an invasion of privacy. Like, using racist and sexist words in private conversation at home - that can't be policed - even though I don't think that kind of conversation is cool. Verbal threats of violence, even private, are illegal. They are not and shouldn't be a fundemental right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top