Political DBag Hall of Fame

Serious hypothetical: if Donald Trump successfully thwarted the electoral college confirmation, refused to leave the White House, and surrounded himself with a coalition of white supremacist militias and renegade police and military, would an angry mob be justified in confronting them physically on federal grounds?

I guess this isn't that hypothetical, is it. 

 
Serious hypothetical: if Donald Trump successfully thwarted the electoral college confirmation, refused to leave the White House, and surrounded himself with a coalition of white supremacist militias and renegade police and military, would an angry mob be justified in confronting them physically on federal grounds?

I guess this isn't that hypothetical, is it. 






Yes. Another way to put it is if what this mob thought was happening was actually true, they would have been justified. The problem is it’s all a fantasy. If the election was literally being stolen and our democracy going away then a revolt is justified. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's important we not misconstrue truths with facts. They are different things.

Guy's hypothetical would more than likely be verifiable and provable if it were to happen, based on fact. We would see the president actively insulting our democracy and attempting to retain power.

The insurrection we saw last week was not based on verifiable fact. It was based on a perceived truth without verifiable fact.

 
It's important we not misconstrue truths with facts. They are different things.

Guy's hypothetical would more than likely be verifiable and provable if it were to happen, based on fact. We would see the president actively insulting our democracy and attempting to retain power.

The insurrection we saw last week was not based on verifiable fact. It was based on a perceived truth without verifiable fact.
the insurrection was based on a Big Lie.   a lie told and retold by our president and his sycophants.   we have seen something like it before in history....but bringing that up would be "hyperbole"

 
I think many in the mob, along with the feckless Republicans opposing certification, don't really care if Trump is lying. So they aren't about to be swayed by facts. For the first time in American history they've discovered a workaround to employ if your candidate doesn't win the election. Between staying in power and cockblocking your political adversary, there's a strong motivation play along.

 
Facts are facts. People can do what they want with them though, like being f#&%ing idiots and not know them when they slap them in the face, or choose to ignore them because they're inconvenient.


I don't want to argue semantics over the words truth and fact, but I'm merely saying they can both be manipulated.  I'm not implying they have been or anything, just that they can.  They can be flat out ignored too, how long did it take the Vatican to admit the world is round?  And I've discussed this here before and it's never received well, but fact and truth can look one way from a certain perspective and a different way from another.

I think many in the mob, along with the feckless Republicans opposing certification, don't really care if Trump is lying. So they aren't about to be swayed by facts. For the first time in American history they've discovered a workaround to employ if your candidate doesn't win the election. Between staying in power and cockblocking your political adversary, there's a strong motivation play along.


I think a large portion of the MAGA crowd is in opposition because they believe the election was stolen, not because they don't care if he is lying.  Genuinely I cannot think of one I've encountered that entertained the notion of it all being a fallacy and they wouldn't care.  But to that end even if there was indisputable proof that Trump was lying the tinfoil hat would come out.  So again, it's what truth do you want to believe.

 
Facts are indisputable and based on empirical research i.e. dogs bark, cats meow, humans poop.

Truths are different because they can be based on facts and beliefs; beliefs, of which, can be based on lies. They're not interchangeable terms even though people misconstrue them regularly.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Facts are indisputable and based on empirical research i.e. dogs bark, cats meow, humans poop.

Truths are different because they can be based on facts and beliefs; beliefs, of which, can be based on lies. They're not interchangeable terms even though people misconstrue them regularly.
This is a fact. One of our favorite former posters used to "hit us with some truths", which of course were nothing more than obvious lies  :lol:

 
Facts are indisputable and based on empirical research i.e. dogs bark, cats meow, humans poop.

Truths are different because they can be based on facts and beliefs; beliefs, of which, can be based on lies. They're not interchangeable terms even though people misconstrue them regularly.


Sure and that's basically how it works, or at least is supposed to work.  But I'm a lot further on the side of "we aren't given the whole story", as in the government mostly lies to us and manipulates us.  It's impossible to prove that they are because they control facts therefore truth is what they want it to be.  I don't prescribe to most conspiracy theories but I do think we get misled most of the time.  That's a big reason I dislike political outrage so much.

 
Sure and that's basically how it works, or at least is supposed to work.  But I'm a lot further on the side of "we aren't given the whole story", as in the government mostly lies to us and manipulates us.  It's impossible to prove that they are because they control facts therefore truth is what they want it to be.  I don't prescribe to most conspiracy theories but I do think we get misled most of the time.  That's a big reason I dislike political outrage so much.




People get angry about lies, you're complaining about lies, and you don't like it when people get angry about lies?

 
Back
Top