Douchebag Thread for Politics & Religion Spill Over

MLB 51 said:
1995 Redux said:
It would be like Zoogs making a remark about say Pro Wrestling, then me lecturing him on why even though his comment wasn't technically wrong it is misguided. He knows nothing of what I'm telling him and can tell my stance varies from his. What would he gain trying to debate me on a subject he doesn't have a full grasp of?

And I don't like engaging in these discussions here because they aren't friendly chats when you're sitting in my seat. You disagree with the discussion, but know if you say anything that you are instantly outnumbered and don't have enough information to successfully offer an opposing view that will be heard. It would be nice to be able to come here and learn a thing or two about political issues, I just don't see a perspective I can get on board with most the time. Not a knock against anyone, just how it comes off to me most the time.
Click to expand...
My best advice is, don't respond to the post. I stay away from posting in P&R forums for mostly the same reasons as you state.
Click to expand...
I have spoken privately with multiple people who feel the same way. I really thought my comment was bland enough to not get sucked into a debate, but I haven't learned better yet I guess.

 
1995 Redux said:
It would be like Zoogs making a remark about say Pro Wrestling, then me lecturing him on why even though his comment wasn't technically wrong it is misguided. He knows nothing of what I'm telling him and can tell my stance varies from his. What would he gain trying to debate me on a subject he doesn't have a full grasp of?

And I don't like engaging in these discussions here because they aren't friendly chats when you're sitting in my seat. You disagree with the discussion, but know if you say anything that you are instantly outnumbered and don't have enough information to successfully offer an opposing view that will be heard. It would be nice to be able to come here and learn a thing or two about political issues, I just don't see a perspective I can get on board with most the time. Not a knock against anyone, just how it comes off to me most the time.
Click to expand...
Listen to what is being said and you will learn. Ask questions and don't make statements and you will learn even more. If you're honestly curious ask the damn questions and do some research yourself. You say you don't have time, but you have time to post here and make comments.
How you feel about your ignorance is no ones fault but your own if you choose not to learn.

 
1995 Redux said:
zoogs said:
What's the spade? Go on -- that's the entire discussion we've been having. I'd be happy to see you not opt out of it this time.
Click to expand...
You read what you want to read. I took it one way, you took it another. And in your confrontational way, you label me....again.
It's pretty disheartening to see an Admin be so obtuse. "Discuss politics with us, or we will criticize you. Agree with us during discusion, or we will label you and gang up on you."
Click to expand...
Lol... an admin being obtuse? Here? No way!

 
So you want to have an opinion and have it count equally as others', but you don't want to have it criticized, even though you don't have the data or the evidence or the research/experience to back it up, and even though you actually hate talking about it because you feel ganged up on when people on the internet point out inconsistencies in your perspective.

It would be like Zoogs making a remark about say Pro Wrestling, then me lecturing him on why even though his comment wasn't technically wrong it is misguided. He knows nothing of what I'm telling him and can tell my stance varies from his. What would he gain trying to debate me on a subject he doesn't have a full grasp of?
Click to expand...
Here's where this analogy doesn't work. Number one, zoogs would probably never say much of anything with authority about pro wrestling if he wasn't fairly educated on it (I've personally seen him discuss topics that he freely admits at the start he knows very little about). Second, if he did, and you explained to him the misguided nature of his position, he wouldn't get defensive and say that you are pushing him away from pro wrestling, or that it's so frustrating how you don't understand him. He'd act like an adult and accept the correction as a learning opportunity, or at least discuss it calmly with interest.

 
Interesting analogy. I can't imagine having an opinion about a wrestler that I'd stick to in spite of evidence I wasn't willing to consider, and then arguing that mine was the more reasonable stance.

If I did, it would be inconsequential.

 
ZRod said:
1995 Redux said:
It would be like Zoogs making a remark about say Pro Wrestling, then me lecturing him on why even though his comment wasn't technically wrong it is misguided. He knows nothing of what I'm telling him and can tell my stance varies from his. What would he gain trying to debate me on a subject he doesn't have a full grasp of?

And I don't like engaging in these discussions here because they aren't friendly chats when you're sitting in my seat. You disagree with the discussion, but know if you say anything that you are instantly outnumbered and don't have enough information to successfully offer an opposing view that will be heard. It would be nice to be able to come here and learn a thing or two about political issues, I just don't see a perspective I can get on board with most the time. Not a knock against anyone, just how it comes off to me most the time.
Click to expand...
Listen to what is being said and you will learn. Ask questions and don't make statements and you will learn even more. If you're honestly curious ask the damn questions and do some research yourself. You say you don't have time, but you have time to post here and make comments.How you feel about your ignorance is no ones fault but your own if you choose not to learn.
Click to expand...
zoogs said:
Interesting analogy. I can't imagine having an opinion about a wrestler that I'd stick to in spite of evidence I wasn't willing to consider, and then arguing that mine was the more reasonable stance.

If I did, it would be inconsequential.
Click to expand...
Here's the thing, I haven't had much time to post here lately, and the little time I have had has been fairly unpleasant.

Both of you are basically telling me to do my research, ask questions and join these debates. But if I do that and don't agree with the majority, it will start a whole new pissing match that I frankly don't care to be a part of. This is why people complain about politics spilling out onto the rest of the board. It happens, I get that. You guys think you're making a difference, that's great and I'm not going to piss in your cheerios and say otherwise. If politics is a passion of yours, great. It's not personally a passion of mine, and honestly I am going to do my damndest to avoid any discussion that pertains to politics. Not because I don't care at all, but because that's not what I'm here for. If I were I would still not exactly be gung ho to jump into the discussions because they basically tend to bring out the worst in people and it gets personal.

If me not wanting to partake in your discussions makes me a fool in your eyes or makes me "part of the problem" then by all means feel free to place me on ignore. If not, that's great. I'll avoid the dicussions completely if that's what it takes I guess.

 
Well, not wanting to join in the discussion doesn't make you a fool and I'm certainly not interested in putting you on ignore. The odd thing, as I've emphasized, is joining the discussion by offering a view, not having interest in supporting it, but absolutely sticking with it. And arguing that this is reasonable.

The deal with this Trump comment for example is that he's not wrong about Australia. He just happens to be spearheading an effort to drive the U.S. in the opposite direction. Hence, the critics.

I don't think that point can really be debated. I also don't think anyone can rationally mistake the AHCA for something that can achieve UHC. There are arguments in favor of the AHCA but they are along different contours than "this is the universal healthcare bill". If you aligned with Paul Ryan's beliefs for example, that would be consistent and fine if you don't want to get into the details. Trump is trying to claim both, and that's less okay. It would be dishonesty if there weren't a strong possibility that he simply does not know the difference. This is what the critics of Trump's statement are pointing out.

 
zoogs said:
The odd thing, as I've emphasized, is joining the discussion by offering a view, not having interest in supporting it, but absolutely sticking with it. And arguing that this is reasonable.
Click to expand...
Sigh...

My original comment that his statement wasn't wrong got jumped on because I didn't join the lynch mob berrating him. Sorry, I just don't have an interest in it, seems like a waste of time to me.

I'd have to go back and look at it all, but my reply to you was that I don't personally believe we were moving anywhere near UHC under the last administration or their system. If that's not what you were getting at, then I misread something and let's just leave it at that.

 
UHC has been untenable in America for a long, long time. It's true that the ACA wasn't UHC. It was in fact a fairly conservative model. Critics from the left complained that it wasn't single payer. Its proponents suggested that it was a way to bridge the gap, and I think this makes sense. The US was unlikely to leap from what it had before to single payer in a single bound. The ACA provided a substantially more government involved framework. UHC is much, much more government involved than that.

I'm sorry if you felt jumped on, but I do think it's important to point out the reason why Trump's catching flak for this. Here he is championing UHC while his administration has been hard at work making sure to demolish the possibility of the same thing in the US.

I hope you realize that you're making some sort of thesis about the validity of Trump's statement when you argue that it's just a lynch mob berating him. There's a reason this is a shockingly inconsistent statement for Trump to be making. It's either extremely misinformed, extremely dihonest, or some combination of that. I hope this clarifies, but if you still think it's a lynch mob and don't want to get into why, that's fine and we can leave it there, too.

 
Criticizing what Trump does and says would be a full time job, I just don't get the attraction. He says sh#t all the time that he doesn't think about first, I almost never give it a second thought since the next day there will be abother statement he makes to dissect.

The guy is nothing more than a damn puppet used to distract the public from what's going on behind the scenes. Bush was the same way. The Republican president gets made out to be a moron and the Democrat gets made to look like a pansy. That's the dance now.

 
Redux and zoogs

giphy.gif


 
The ridiculous thing is, all Redux said was that what Trump said was correct. Everybody agrees that Trump saying Australia's health care is better than our's is a true statement. But it is not well accepted to ever point out anything that Trump says or does might actually be right. So the story gets twisted to, well, Trump isn't heading us towards UHC so he's a dipsh#t. Australia has UHC so Trump is an idiot. And all Redux said was what we all know, their healthcare is better. Some people can't take that simple statement without making more out of it. Maybe I missed something else in a thread somewhere but based on the discussion the status update, I tend to agree with Redux on this one. Even though we all know deep in our hearts that Trump could never ever in a million years do or say one itsy bitsy thing that borders on correct. I mean that's just crazy talk.

 
Back
Top