Why Don't People Like To Talk About Politics?

StoneByStone said:
Alright, if you want to consider someone an idiot and be rude to them, just because they disagree with you, then that's your business.

All I can say is that I've had huge disagreements with PoliTalker and ThatOwlWoman, but they haven't blocked me, and I consider them pretty smart. Too bad the Trumpsters here aren't as intelligent and tolerant.
Click to expand...

Considering an idiot and idiot isn't being rude. Disagreement has nothing to do with it. It is my business if I want to state facts. You should try it sometime.

Interesting how you rail against name calling then use the word "Trumpeters". There's another term you should learn. It's hypocrite.
 
CFM said:
Considering an idiot and idiot isn't being rude. Disagreement has nothing to do with it. It is my business if I want to state facts. You should try it sometime.

Interesting how you rail against name calling then use the word "Trumpeters". There's another term you should learn. It's hypocrite.
Click to expand...

How is that an insult? A Trumpster is a Trump supporter.
 
StoneByStone said:
Alright, if you want to consider someone an idiot and be rude to them, just because they disagree with you, then that's your business.

All I can say is that I've had huge disagreements with PoliTalker and ThatOwlWoman, but they haven't blocked me, and I consider them pretty smart. Too bad the Trumpsters here aren't as intelligent and tolerant.
Click to expand...
The thin-skinned Politalker is the biggest blowhard hypocrite on this board. Merely having a different opinion is considered a personal insult to her. I've never once insulted her.

So much faux disdain for "insults" yet lauds some of the most disgustingly rude posters here, such as Microfiber. The irony is so blatant it's comical.

You know it's true...
 
Life is Golden said:
The thin-skinned Politalker is the biggest blowhard hypocrite on this board. Merely having a different opinion is considered a personal insult to her. I've never once insulted her.
Click to expand...

Yet even after a huge debate, where we argued over race and immigration, PoliTalker didn't block me. And really, the only people complaining about PoliTalker are people who I've seen hurl insults constantly. CFM does it all the time, even if he's trying to spin it now.
 
CFM said:
Then why not say Trump supporter? Hypocrite.

Interesting how those that don't consider that name calling get upset when an Obama supporter is called a n-lover.
Click to expand...

That's different. Nigger is a racial slur. And you're implying that Obama supporters only support him because of his race. If you were to call them Obamaists or Obamsters, they probably wouldn't mind.
 
StoneByStone said:
Yet even after a huge debate, where we argued over race and immigration, PoliTalker didn't block me. And really, the only people complaining about PoliTalker are people who I've seen hurl insults constantly. CFM does it all the time, even if he's trying to spin it now.
Click to expand...

You didn't hurt his feelings.

I know the difference between name calling and identification. You don't, cunt.
 
CFM said:
Then why not say Trump supporter? Hypocrite.

Interesting how those that don't consider that name calling get upset when an Obama supporter is called a n-lover.
Click to expand...

That's different. Nigger is a racial slur. And you're implying that Obama supporters only support him because of his race. If you were to call them Obamaists or Obamsters, they probably wouldn't mind.
 
AssHatZombie said:
could anyone get that money to run? how would that work?
Click to expand...

Everyone who qualified would have access to funding and to debate. Qualifying would just weed out the crazies. The truth is we used to be a lot closer to that. The debates were not just partisan Dem and Repub. They included greens, Libertarians, and even Communists could debate. I believe it was the League of Women Voters that ran the debates and decided they had to disqualify some parties.
With public financing, it would be possible to have more parties and eventually they would matter. I remember in the late 60s when Zoltan Ferency ran for Gov, in the Human Rights Party. He was debating Romney.
Part of what went wrong was when Reagan eliminated the equal time provision for TV. When a party got free TV time either on news or talking, the opponents had to get time to present their opposing views. That included some 3rd and 4th parties. They had a shot and they could do damage or help their positions. It was educational too. You learned who was running on Libertarian, Green, Patriot Party, Workers World Party, and others. If you listened, you might think they had some good points.
 
Gonzomin said:
Everyone who qualified would have access to funding and to debate. Qualifying would just weed out the crazies. The truth is we used to be a lot closer to that. The debates were not just partisan Dem and Repub. They included greens, Libertarians, and even Communists could debate. I believe it was the League of Women Voters that ran the debates and decided they had to disqualify some parties.
With public financing, it would be possible to have more parties and eventually they would matter. I remember in the late 60s when Zoltan Ferency ran for Gov, in the Human Rights Party. He was debating Romney.
Part of what went wrong was when Reagan eliminated the equal time provision for TV. When a party got free TV time either on news or talking, the opponents had to get time to present their opposing views. That included some 3rd and 4th parties. They had a shot and they could do damage or help their positions. It was educational too. You learned who was running on Libertarian, Green, Patriot Party, Workers World Party, and others. If you listened, you might think they had some good points.
Click to expand...

who decides who are the crazies? sorry but your plan is fucked. you should focus on reversing citizens united.
 
StoneByStone said:
That's different. Nigger is a racial slur. And you're implying that Obama supporters only support him because of his race. If you were to call them Obamaists or Obamsters, they probably wouldn't mind.
Click to expand...

It's a term just like any other term. As far as the racist claim, when those that say it is use it toward their own, those claims are no longer valid.

I'm not implying it.

They've been called Obamanites and claims of racism flew immediately.
 
cawacko said:
Many of us grew up being taught you don't talk politics or religion in polite company. But that aside, there are people who wish death upon those they disagree with politically. If you're hosting a dinner party among friends and/or neighbors for example is that what you want to happen? You hear about family members who don't speak because of political disagreement.

There are a lot of reason people don't speak about politics.
Click to expand...

Just for the record cawacko, I don't consider you to be "human scum." :)
 
CFM said:
It's a term just like any other term. As far as the racist claim, when those that say it is use it toward their own, those claims are no longer valid.
Click to expand...

"Nigga" isn't a racist word. "Nigger," especially in context, is a racial slur. You're also assuming that Obama supporters only like him for racial reasons when you call them nigger-lovers.

They've been called Obamanites and claims of racism flew immediately.
Click to expand...

I never heard anyone call racism over the word Obamanite. If anyone did, then they're stupid. Obamanite and Trumpster are not insults and they're not racist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top