Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Here's what I've been wondering. A fair number of people on this Board have commented on friends or relatives who have indicated they support Trump. Are those friends and relatives included in the sexist, racist, Islamaphobic, homophobic and hateful "deplorables", or is this like Congressmen, where your guy is ok, but it's everyone else's guy who is deplorable?

Yes they are.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

First, it's libel, not slander. Second, it's not illegal (a crime), at least not here. You can be sued for it though.

slan·der: the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

Want to try again?

 

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

I skimmed the article. Fixed your post.


Seriously, could "there" have "been" any more "random" "words" that were quoted "for emphasis" in that article?

Well played

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

slan·der: the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

Want to try again?

Dude, it's not a crime. At least not here. I think in Britain they might still have some sort of criminal defamation laws, but they simply don't here.

And again, because both the article he linked, and the post itself were written and not spoken, they aren't even slander. Try to keep up.

Edit: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-law-made-simple-29718.html

 

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Dude, it's not a crime. At least not here. I think in Britain they might still have some sort of criminal defamation laws, but they simply don't here.

And again, because both the article he linked, and the post itself were written and not spoken, they aren't even slander. Try to keep up.

Dude...you need to realize who I am talking to and what I am trying to do to him/her/bot. Methinks you take this message board waaaaaaaaaaaay too seriously. (I was pre-law, I actually know the difference FWIW)

But here, just for you because apparently you need someone to hold your hand...Frauddy is a troll. If you get him going, he tends to go off the Alex Jones cliff and posts stuff even Jones thinks is wacko. If you troll him just the right way it can be hours of fun for all of us who have an IQ over 12 and unites us in our mocking of him. (deplorables and bourgeoisie)

Now please, unwind you underwear and lighten up Francis this isnt life and death

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Are those really good people deplorable and irredeemable, or do they fall in the other half?

IMO, no person is ever irredeemable. But that might be the Baltimore Catechism speaking.

Beliefs are deplorable. People? Like Francis, who am I to judge?

But if we can steer away from the semantics of salvation, there are certainly a large number of followers of Trump who I would not allow into my home. I think it is the largest such percentage of any significant candidate since George Wallace. And I believe as good citizens those of us who revile the beliefs Trump is playing to have a civic duty to oppose his campaign and avoid people who espouse those beliefs taking power.

That's very easy for me to say, though, because it aligns with my partisan interest. The true heroes of this election will be Republican party loyalists and conservatives of conscience who are #nevertrump.

 

[geezer]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

I had a genuinely frightening thought this morning. What if through some quirk of circumstances Donald Trump were actually elected to be the president of the U.S.? (I know, I know, but just "what if"?) Where would that leave us as a species?

 

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

I had a genuinely frightening thought this morning. What if through some quirk of circumstances Donald Trump were actually elected to be the president of the U.S.? (I know, I know, but just "what if"?) Where would that leave us as a species?

Ever see the movie Dr. Strangelove?

 

[geezer]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Ever see the movie Dr. Strangelove?

No.
But as I've read, Groucho in "Duck Soup" might be the best we can hope for.

 

[joecct]

No.
But as I've read, Groucho in "Duck Soup" might be the best we can hope for.

Geezer-you are missing a classic. After that, rent "Fail Safe".

 

[burd]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

I realize Kep has a poll thread on the election, but who here will vote for Trump?

 

[French Rage]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Ever see the movie Dr. Strangelove?

That's too optimistic. My money's on Idiocracy.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

So Speaking of Candidates Having Their Organization Investigated...

I am sure we will hear all about it...at least as much as we hear about Hillary being sick or whatever.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Geezer-you are missing a classic. After that, rent "Fail Safe".

Major Nelson FTW.

Fail Safe is the real thing -- along with Strangelove the best two cold war movies ever made (strange that such a significant theme did not produce better movies).

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

So you are suggesting that the voter ID people start attacking voting locations?

I didn't suggest it. I pointed out the person who just had. Oh. Wait. It was ... you. Here:

Because people have threatened (and have attacked) government employees, but not voting locations. .

 

[alfablue]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

I didn't suggest it. I pointed out the person who just had. Oh. Wait. It was ... you. Here:

That line of reasoning explains a lot. I was pointing out facts, not suggestions.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

That line of reasoning explains a lot. I was pointing out facts, not suggestions.

Facts are always apt to spawn new (good or atrocious) ideas. You rolled it out.


PS - Check your sig line. It's out of date.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Every citizen is born with the right. It has to be forfeited. It is absolute.

I know logic has never been your thing but stop day drinking it is making your nonsense even more ridiculous

is everyone in the country a citizen who has not forfeited that right? if that is the case, then no proof of identity is needed.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

2 amazing statistics.

1. The GOP now is significantly less diverse than the Democratic Party was in 1992.

2. In 1992, 38 percent of Republicans were fifty or older. In 2016, the figure is 58 percent.

 

[burd]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

2 amazing statistics.

1. The GOP now is significantly less diverse than the Democratic Party was in 1992.

2. In 1992, 38 percent of Republicans were fifty or older. In 2016, the figure is 58 percent.

Explains a few things.

Including why many serious conservatives with good ideas might feel angry that their party's dialogue has been taken over by noisy idiots.