- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Ron Desantis goes full Kasich while his poll #s plunge
Posted on 6/30/23 at 6:51 pm to davyjones
Posted on 6/30/23 at 6:51 pm to davyjones
quote:
I think we’re seeing the concept I mentioned a couple of times earlier. To touch on it again, it’s the idea that not if but when your definition or interpretation of a topic doesn’t match the other person’s own definition or interpretation, that person simply declares that you’re wrong or might even ignore it altogether. Not a knock on anyone, I suppose it’s human nature. However, not something that a person wouldn’t be able to identify and work within those parameters. We ought to list our definitions on post signature of certain terms, sorta like pronouns.
I think you can have a 50 page thread on the way different people communicate. Some are incapable of reading between lines. Some can’t process hyperbole and extract intent. Some struggle with big picture thinking and get lost in the weeds.
1
Posted on 6/30/23 at 6:51 pm to moneyg
quote:
I did.
Your definition of establishment: "it's what is behind DeSantis"
Your definition of anti-establishment: "Trump and those that support him"
That's asinine.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 6:58 pm to moneyg
quote:
I did.
You did not
quote:
You lack conviction.
You lack definitions.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 6:59 pm to moneyg
quote:
think you can have a 50 page thread on the way different people communicate. Some are incapable of reading between lines. Some can’t process hyperbole and extract intent. Some struggle with big picture thinking and get lost in the weeds.
Some can’t answer simple fricking questions.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:01 pm to moneyg
quote:
quote:
None of your posts define it. It really should not be difficult. Just state your definition of GOPe in specific terms. Don’t use general pronouns like “they” And be sure to articulate your basis for considering someone like Mitch McConnell to be “GOPe” while excluding people like Lindsey Graham from being “GOPe”
You are either very confused (which explains your position) or you think you are playing defense by being obtuse (which is an admission if who you are).
Either way, we disagree.
Thought this was a thread about pizza?
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:03 pm to davyjones
quote:
If the Trump-Graham thing never happened, and instead Graham reached out to Desantis and said he wanted to support and back him, even in a outward and open way, let’s say the same exact position as he’s doing for Trump…….do you believe RD would accept the offer, or turn it down altogether?
I don't know but I am 100% sure you assholes would be screaming about how this is further proof DeSantis is a Deep State stooge.
Why doesn't Trump get the same treatment?
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:15 pm to David_DJS
quote:
His endorsement? He'd be happy to get it.
Defining a candidate for office by who supports him is squishy AF, as moneyg is pretending to not be learning. There is myriad reasons a person/organization decides to support/endorse a candidate.
A candidate is far more defined by his own actions and to a lesser extent, his own words, but that becomes problematic for Team Trump.
DJ, the reason I made that post was in response to my amigo’s relentless efforts to do just what you said - judge a candidate at least in part on the basis of support and endorsement from and by Lindsay “Toota” Graham. My point being, as you mentioned, either guy would be pleased to have LD supporting them, as he probably isn’t the GOPe bandit amigo believes he is.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:22 pm to davyjones
quote:
My point being, as you mentioned, either guy would be pleased to have LD supporting them, as he probably isn’t the GOPe bandit amigo believes he is.
No, whatever we decided "establishment" is, Graham is very much it. I didn't suggest DeSantis would be happy about Graham's endorsement because he's not the RINO most see him as, because he's that. I believe DeSantis would accept his endorsement because a) he's a prominent senatory, and b) a endorsement doesn't define the candidate.
It's folly to characterize/label a candidate by people that support them, but that's all the only-Trumpers have in regard to their dismissal of DeSantis because reality is, Trump as an elected official has presided far more like an "establishment" guy than DeSantis has.
This post was edited on 6/30/23 at 7:29 pm
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:24 pm to moneyg
quote:
I did.
No. You didn’t. If I’m wrong, copy your post that defined it.
quote:
I suspect you are afraid to make your real point…that it doesn’t exist. It’s noted.
My point is that you can’t define it with any degree of particularity such that “GOPe” does not also include individuals who support or work for Donald Trump.
This post was edited on 6/30/23 at 7:28 pm
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:26 pm to Fun Bunch
Here here!
Great post
Great post
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:43 pm to 14&Counting
quote:
Why doesn't Trump get the same treatment?
Rules for thee but not for me. Just like democrats.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:44 pm to davyjones
quote:
it’s the idea that not if but when your definition or interpretation of a topic doesn’t match the other person’s own definition or interpretation,
He has given no definition. None whatsoever.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:56 pm to moneyg
quote:
You don't want to listen. I've said it over and over. The complaint isn't Desantis per se. It's the GOPe. And, Desantis is the GOPe candidate.
I don’t have many quarrels with Trump’s policy. He sucks at executing policy.
DeSantis isn’t the “GOPe” candidate. He’s the leading candidate that the GOPe prefers versus Trump. If Nikki Haley was running second or Tim Scott was running second, they would be the GOPe candidate. And the GOPe would be happier with either of them than they are with DeSantis.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:58 pm to cajunangelle
Your political analysis is worthless and you’re stupid.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 7:59 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Why won’t you define GOPe?
quote:
The GOPe are the current leadership and power brokers within the party
It may not win the blue ribbon for effort, but it’s representative of player moneyg’s thought process on the matter. And as discussed previously, you simply don’t agree with his offering. Which also is perfectly fine.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 8:00 pm to moneyg
quote:
I’ve responded to you in good faith for hours. It’s repetitive.
You aren’t responding in good faith. You’re filibustering and obfuscating.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 8:05 pm to pankReb
quote:
Some can’t answer simple fricking questions.
I just glanced at this thread but if I had to guess, why waste time answering someone who isn’t asking a question in good faith?
It’s obvious you aren’t asking a genuine question.
Posted on 6/30/23 at 8:11 pm to LSUAngelHere1
quote:
I just glanced at this thread
quote:
It’s obvious you aren’t asking a genuine question.
Maybe you should glance a little longer
Posted on 6/30/23 at 8:13 pm to RazorBroncs
I fricking love this thread!
Posted on 6/30/23 at 8:14 pm to the808bass
you are going on and on worse than almost fun bunches and the Bug. demanding you essentially be told repeatedly why your guy isn't winning any polls and has to rent a crowd.
you have been told and it is obvious. yet you want an exact definition in a gotcha manner under the guise of feigned reasoning.
if you are so confident. why are you going on and on or give a hoot what anybody thinks?
flaming people and calling them stupid shows
-you are trying to convince yourself
-you have a weak argument
-you work for the candidate's campaign and benefit somehow from practically begging people to support your candidate
-you are a democrat that hates Trump and would back a bobbing head trinket before Trump wins again
you have been told and it is obvious. yet you want an exact definition in a gotcha manner under the guise of feigned reasoning.
if you are so confident. why are you going on and on or give a hoot what anybody thinks?
flaming people and calling them stupid shows
-you are trying to convince yourself
-you have a weak argument
-you work for the candidate's campaign and benefit somehow from practically begging people to support your candidate
-you are a democrat that hates Trump and would back a bobbing head trinket before Trump wins again
Page 17 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News