Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 21, 2016, 07:25:02 AM
I want to send links, make arguments against HRC, post cogent details on facebook (though I loathe it) and generally, gently raise their awareness of the deception being carried out in a ratio of roughly 20:1 in terms of media coverage of negatives, favoring HRC.
They will never vote for Trump, but should I as a friend just stand by while they slide unaware into an HRC presidency? Don't these dear people warrant some effort on my part to break through the media wall for them?
Post by: Bob Noel on October 21, 2016, 07:50:20 AM
Lately I am obsessing a tad, okay, a lot, about my dear liberal friends who are HRC voters. Some of them Catholic. All of them mainstream-only media people.
I want to send links, make arguments against HRC, post cogent details on facebook (though I loathe it) and generally, gently raise their awareness of the deception being carried out in a ratio of roughly 20:1 in terms of media coverage of negatives, favoring HRC.
They will never vote for Trump, but should I as a friend just stand by while they slide unaware into an HRC presidency? Don't these dear people warrant some effort on my part to break through the media wall for them?
your concern is admirable.
but let me make a counterargument (and bring in Aviation content): In my flight training in the area of stalls, especially power-on stalls, my instructor let me know that she will initially prompt me as necessary to kick in more right-rudder (and add some if I was slow). But after a few times of a student not listening, she would let the stall break and spin start. All kind of a kick in the pants to the student.
Maybe your liberal friends need to get their way and pay the price. But I doubt they will understand the cause and effect... instead they will blame the republicans, Bush, and/or the vast right-wing conspiracy.
Having said that, for 2A rights information you can look at the NRA ILA website. They have multiple articles regarding the lies from the corrupt doormat. https://www.nraila.org/news/in-the-news/
WRT the mishandling of classified materials, you can juxtapose the corrupt doormats public statement (and testimony to Congress) (e.g., no classified emails were sent or received) vs the statements from the FBI (e.g., more than 100 emails recovered were classified)
Remind them of her lies regarding the videos
Remind them of her lies about being under fire in Bosnia
Remind them of her outrageous unethical attacks of a 12-year old rape victim
Post by: acrogimp on October 21, 2016, 08:12:09 AM
The only folks who are still reachable IMO are the wish-washy Republicans who have their panties in a wad about the latest media-manufactured Trump scandal that are thinking of sitting it or wasting a vote on Johnson, and the truly undecided - and that requires a balancing act of pointing out the POLICY strengths of Trump while attacking the POLICY and PERSONAL issues for Hillary.
No easy task, I have given up on it all - I'm going to hunker down and take care of me and mine regardless of the outcome (I have my doubts about the ability of Trump to win given the closeness since he has to not only win the actual vote, but to win by more than the margin of fraud, fighting the fully exposed and partisan media as well as the Republican establishment itself). And to be clear lest my comments be taken out of context, I think out of the entire crop of candidates this cycle he is doing better than any of the others would have been doing since I believe they would have all folded like cheap suits months ago.
'Gimp
Post by: nddons on October 21, 2016, 08:31:04 AM
Lately I am obsessing a tad, okay, a lot, about my dear liberal friends who are HRC voters. Some of them Catholic. All of them mainstream-only media people.I presume that if they truly are friends of yours, then they are intelligent and are making a decision based upon their ideology, and any true facts would not change their minds.
I want to send links, make arguments against HRC, post cogent details on facebook (though I loathe it) and generally, gently raise their awareness of the deception being carried out in a ratio of roughly 20:1 in terms of media coverage of negatives, favoring HRC.
They will never vote for Trump, but should I as a friend just stand by while they slide unaware into an HRC presidency? Don't these dear people warrant some effort on my part to break through the media wall for them?
That is why I'm shocked that it seems not a single democrat has a crisis of conscience in voting for Hillary.
If they are not intelligent, tell them you'll drive them to the polls on November 9.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 21, 2016, 09:35:18 AM
Same thing with the Project Veritas videos where we hear them bragging about disrupting Trump rallys.
Post by: PaulS on October 21, 2016, 09:44:28 AM
Post by: SoonerAviator on October 21, 2016, 11:13:36 AM
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 21, 2016, 10:42:07 PM
I don't expect Trump to win, but unless HRC voters dig a little deeper they won't really know what kind of crap they're going to put in the White House.
Post by: Bob Noel on October 22, 2016, 04:10:41 AM
Appreciate the replies, thanks.
I don't expect Trump to win, but unless HRC voters dig a little deeper they won't really know what kind of crap they're going to put in the White House.
the wilful ignorance of liberals doesn't bode well for our nation.
Post by: JeffDG on October 22, 2016, 04:46:27 AM
the wilful ignorance of liberals doesn't bode well for our nation.If only Republicans had nominated a candidate, instead of a caricature. Alas, that's not the universe we inhabit.
Post by: Anthony on October 22, 2016, 05:59:46 AM
the wilful ignorance of liberals doesn't bode well for our nation.
If Hillary does win, I think you will see pockets of resistance when she starts to implement her totalitarian, communist policies through the SCOTUS. She will legislate through the courts if Congress stays R. It will NOT be pretty.
Post by: asechrest on October 22, 2016, 06:32:31 AM
That first sentence is important. If, like so many on this forum, your position is that Democrats are gullible fools with the wool pulled over their eyes, your veiled condescension will be apparent, and debating in good faith will be difficult.
Post by: PaulS on October 22, 2016, 06:40:23 AM
If you intend to change hearts and minds, go into the discussion with a recognition that their views are valid. Then focus on plugging gaps in knowledge and promoting what you see as simple truths.
That first sentence is important. If, like so many on this forum, your position is that Democrats are gullible fools with the wool pulled over their eyes, your veiled condescension will be apparent, and debating in good faith will be difficult.
And you my friend, need to read that first sentence again, because judging from your last sentence, you are not practicing what you preach.
Post by: Anthony on October 22, 2016, 07:05:35 AM
If you intend to change hearts and minds, go into the discussion with a recognition that their views are valid. Then focus on plugging gaps in knowledge and promoting what you see as simple truths.
Pure lies, and falsehoods are NOT valid. That is what the Democrats use to further their control of law abiding citizens that own guns. The simple truth is that people cause violence, not guns, and most of the stats the Dems use to further MORE gun control are suicides, and gang violence.
Criminals DON'T follow more gun control laws. It only affects the law abiding gun owners, and the reason the Dems don't want the law abiding to have guns is more CONTROL, and dependence.
Post by: asechrest on October 22, 2016, 08:42:36 AM
And you my friend, need to read that first sentence again, because judging from your last sentence, you are not practicing what you preach.
I certainly admit to moments of weakness. But I don't use conservative as a pejorative. I never call the entire group of you names like fascist and totalitarian. I never suggest that you are all willfully ignorant or blind. And I certainly don't think you all are gullible fools with the wool pulled over your eyes by the Republican party.
All of that I see from you guys, toward Democrats, on a daily basis.
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 22, 2016, 08:55:53 AM
Obama deceived the Dems but not the R's. Not a single R voted for the lie of Obamacare.
What, exactly do you think non-Dems are not seeing correctly? We see our country imminently governed by more lying, power-hungry Dems. And we are alarmed.
Post by: nddons on October 22, 2016, 07:42:52 PM
You're out of your mind if you think Trump still has a shot of winning, lol. Dude is only going to carry the Republican states that would have voted for Hitler if he were the candidate. I wouldn't be surprised if every swing state goes to Johnson or Hillary.I presume people like you will just stay home since you're so confident of a Clinton win.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: Little Joe on October 23, 2016, 06:48:56 AM
I certainly admit to moments of weakness. But I don't use conservative as a pejorative. I never call the entire group of you names like fascist and totalitarian. I never suggest that you are all willfully ignorant or blind. And I certainly don't think you all are gullible fools with the wool pulled over your eyes by the Republican party.Maybe there is a good reason for that.
All of that I see from you guys, toward Democrats, on a daily basis.
Post by: Anthony on October 23, 2016, 06:57:11 AM
Post by: asechrest on October 23, 2016, 07:48:10 AM
Maybe there is a good reason for that.
And maybe there isn't.
Post by: MarkZ on October 23, 2016, 08:30:02 AM
And maybe there isn't.The dehumanization of one's counterpart/adversary is the first step toward the breakdown and failure of any productive conversation/collaboration/negotiation.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: Anthony on October 23, 2016, 08:40:27 AM
The dehumanization of one's counterpart/adversary is the first step toward the breakdown and failure of any productive conversation/collaboration/negotiation.
Racist! Homophobe! Xenophobe! Islamophobe! Misogynist! Deplorables! What side do we hear that from?
Post by: LevelWing on October 23, 2016, 08:44:18 AM
To me, and I believe many others, "conservative" really means to have the Constitution mean what it says, and what the Founders intended. Liberal/Progressives bend the words of the Constitution to interpret it to mean what they want, not what it actually says. It is actually a perversion of America, and what made this country great.I agree with that, which is why so many conservatives are having a hard time voting for Trump given his position on a lot of issues.
That being said, I understand why conservatives would still vote for him. Anything to stop Hillary from winning. A few weeks out and the uncertainty is still looming and people are anxious. Watch what will happen to gun/ammo/parts prices if she's elected.
Post by: Number7 on October 23, 2016, 10:49:29 AM
The pile of pig shit in a pants suit will legislate it all away with a pen and phone and progressive trash will deny it is happening right up until the thought police come for them.
Post by: asechrest on October 23, 2016, 10:57:28 AM
Racist! Homophobe! Xenophobe! Islamophobe! Misogynist! Deplorables! What side do we hear that from?
No one suggested this tendency was one-sided.
Post by: bflynn on October 23, 2016, 11:10:43 AM
Without fair and impartial news organizations, there is nobody to call out the government and to hold them accountable. Cronyism reigns, chaos ensues and the Republic is gone.
Post by: Lucifer on October 23, 2016, 11:13:20 AM
Did you all notice how nobody calls them "the news" anymore? They're "the media" now, a source of entertainment video like Netflix.
The "4th estate" has lost all credibility now. And honestly it's not even entertaining.
Post by: bflynn on October 23, 2016, 11:17:23 AM
No one suggested this tendency was one-sided.
Yesterday I was listening to NPR while driving - Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me is mildly entertaining. They had their news section where they called out Trump for saying that he wouldn't accept the outcome of the election. After that they gratuitously added something like "And then he said it isn't over until the fat lady sings...and she is a pig".
Seriously? Do they think that because they're mocking a presidential candidate that the words aren't hateful anymore? Do they think the message of fat people are pigs goes away? No, the words are still hateful, the message is still hateful, but now they're coming from their mouths. Hateful messages should never be repeated.
I will listen to NPR again one day, but probably not soon.
Post by: MarkZ on October 23, 2016, 12:42:08 PM
Did you all notice how nobody calls them "the news" anymore? They're "the media" now, a source of entertainment video like Netflix.Agreed. Take out any ability to advertise during a news cast. Make the mission of the newscast to educate and inform the electorate, and continue taxpayer funding of the required air time.
Without fair and impartial news organizations, there is nobody to call out the government and to hold them accountable. Cronyism reigns, chaos ensues and the Republic is gone.
If the news organization is unable or unwilling to impartially and sincerely inform the electorate, cut public funding and disallow said organization from calling themselves journalists or the news. They are then "entertainment" or "the media."
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: LevelWing on October 23, 2016, 12:43:57 PM
Agreed. Take out any ability to advertise during a news cast. Make the mission of the newscast to educate and inform the electorate, and continue taxpayer funding of the required air time.I don't think taking a news site and having it tax payer funded is a good way to keep it "impartial" when "educating" the electorate. It isn't working for NPR. To be fair, a for profit "news" company such as CNN isn't exactly impartial either. At least I know what I'm getting when I tune into CNN.
If the news organization is unable or unwilling to impartially and sincerely inform the electorate, cut public funding and disallow said organization from calling themselves journalists or the news. They are then "entertainment" or "the media."
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: MarkZ on October 23, 2016, 01:07:27 PM
I don't think taking a news site and having it tax payer funded is a good way to keep it "impartial" when "educating" the electorate. It isn't working for NPR. To be fair, a for profit "news" company such as CNN isn't exactly impartial either. At least I know what I'm getting when I tune into CNN.I'm not sure all regular news sites aren't already taxpayer funded in some sort.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: You Only Live Twice on October 23, 2016, 03:02:28 PM
I certainly admit to moments of weakness. But I don't use conservative as a pejorative. I never call the entire group of you names like fascist and totalitarian. I never suggest that you are all willfully ignorant or blind. And I certainly don't think you all are gullible fools with the wool pulled over your eyes by the Republican party.There is nothing, NO THING, valid about leftist doctrine.
All of that I see from you guys, toward Democrats, on a daily basis.
Post by: asechrest on October 23, 2016, 08:38:24 PM
There is nothing, NO THING, valid about leftist doctrine.
This is, of course, an entirely ridiculous statement. That you'd express this sentiment is evidence that you may be a partisan ideologue, and is representative of why our governing bodies have had such difficulty lately. You don't change hearts and minds by summarily proclaiming your opponent's views as without merit. Indeed, doing so is a recipe for spectacular failure of debate. And in the instance of Republican vs. Democrat, that proclamation is simply untrue.
As someone wiser than me once said: "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." Your debate opponent likely has a valid viewpoint. The trick is convincing them that your way is the better way.
Post by: bflynn on October 24, 2016, 07:17:13 AM
I never call the entire group of you names like fascist and totalitarian. I never suggest that you are all willfully ignorant or blind. And I certainly don't think you all are gullible fools with the wool pulled over your eyes by the Republican party.
All of that I see from you guys, toward Democrats, on a daily basis.
And do you think that you are representative of the Democrat party at large? Do you need counter examples?
I certainly admit to moments of weakness. But I don't use conservative as a pejorative. I never call the entire group of you names like fascist and totalitarian. I never suggest that you are all willfully ignorant or blind. And I certainly don't think you all are gullible fools with the wool pulled over your eyes by the Republican party.
All of that I see from you guys, toward Democrats, on a daily basis.
While I agree with you that failing to even try to understand why someone you disagree with thinks the way they do is a failure, I don't think it's the first one. I believe the first failure is believing that your "side" is good and moral and the other "side" is not. Unless you can address that bigotry then you are doomed to never expand or grow.
Post by: asechrest on October 24, 2016, 07:58:55 AM
And do you think that you are representative of the Democrat party at large? Do you need counter examples?
http://www.pilotspin.com/index.php?topic=1515.msg27308#msg27308
While I agree with you that failing to even try to understand why someone you disagree with thinks the way they do is a failure, I don't think it's the first one. I believe the first failure is believing that your "side" is good and moral and the other "side" is not. Unless you can address that bigotry then you are doomed to never expand or grow.
That is derivative of the same fundamental issue that I am discussing: a belief that you are right and your opponent's positions are meritless.
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 24, 2016, 08:25:17 AM
I posit that Democrats (the citizenry at large) are indeed hoodwinked. Not bad people, not even WRONG people, but DECEIVED people.
The media bias is a problem, it is worse than ever this cycle, and it continues unabated and thus Democrats will be fooled.
Yes, Republicans and Libertarians and Zen Buddhists and oyster farmers and crop duster pilots who watch only mainstream media are also fooled, but I observe that Republicans take a deeper look and Democrats just Heil and fall in like lemmings to vote for the D.
One of the reasons I am not voting for the D this year is that I looked deeper. We'll see, but as a whole, the Democrats seem more willing to be fooled. They did rally for a while behind the Socialist, but it he had gotten far enough you can bet the media would have toasted him in favor of HRC. Bernie owns three houses, for heaven's sake. Remember the horror about Romney's houses?
Witness how mad R's are at their own party. I don't see that much with the left. They may not like it, but they won't leave it.
I could be wrong.
Post by: nddons on October 24, 2016, 10:06:57 AM
To me, and I believe many others, "conservative" really means to have the Constitution mean what it says, and what the Founders intended. Liberal/Progressives bend the words of the Constitution to interpret it to mean what they want, not what it actually says. It is actually a perversion of America, and what made this country great.And they want to change it in such a way that the fewest people need to be involved to do so. 5 Supreme Court Justices. 51 Senators and 218 Congressmen. One president.
They have been proven utterly incapable of developing the broad support of The People required for a Constitutional Amendment, so they take the coward's path.
Post by: nddons on October 24, 2016, 10:11:29 AM
No one suggested this tendency was one-sided.Of course. Why would Mark admit that it is very largely something generated only by the left?
Post by: asechrest on October 24, 2016, 10:22:15 AM
Of course. Why would Mark admit that it is very largely something generated only by the left?
I re-read his posts and I don't see that admission.
Post by: Bob Noel on October 24, 2016, 10:49:34 AM
I re-read his posts and I don't see that admission.
wasn't that his point?
Post by: MarkZ on October 24, 2016, 10:49:36 AM
Of course. Why would Mark admit that it is very largely something generated only by the left?Please show where this was done.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: asechrest on October 24, 2016, 11:28:08 AM
wasn't that his point?
No, unless I'm reading it wrong.
Post by: bflynn on October 24, 2016, 11:45:02 AM
That is derivative of the same fundamental issue that I am discussing: a belief that you are right and your opponent's positions are meritless.
But a different aspect of it. You were talking about not listening, I'm talking about having a world view that your opponent is lesser and need not be listened to.
Post by: asechrest on October 24, 2016, 12:07:04 PM
But a different aspect of it. You were talking about not listening, I'm talking about having a world view that your opponent is lesser and need not be listened to.
No. My very first post (http://www.pilotspin.com/index.php?topic=1515.msg27200#msg27200) in this thread encouraged Becky to recognize that her debate opponents have valid views. You and I are talking about very similar things. It is about the recognition that two opposing viewpoints can both be valid.
Post by: Bob Noel on October 24, 2016, 01:12:39 PM
No, unless I'm reading it wrong.
ok. I thought he was being sarcastic (which is pretty hard to definitely tell wrt text)
Post by: MarkZ on October 24, 2016, 02:23:33 PM
ok. I thought he was being sarcastic (which is pretty hard to definitely tell wrt text)It's been my experience that when one group views another in such a denigrating way, there is no value in conversation/collaboration/negotiation.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: You Only Live Twice on October 24, 2016, 05:33:49 PM
It's been my experience that when one group views another in such a denigrating way, there is no value in conversation/collaboration/negotiation.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Tell that to Patty Pantsuit.
(http://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2016/09/10/780/438/694940094001_5119737564001_8055f7d7-2c15-42cb-8cc2-85906c8f77cc.jpg)
Post by: You Only Live Twice on October 24, 2016, 05:34:48 PM
Post by: MarkZ on October 24, 2016, 05:55:54 PM
WTF does this even mean? "Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!"I guess Tapatalk injects its own signature.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!