Trump attacks 'harassment' of Mike Pence at Hamilton musical

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

48 minutes ago, Linzz said:

 

Obnoxious. OK fine. Can't reason with a closed mind. Actually I did take you seriously recently and proved that I was able to acknowledge validity when you posted it and you responded with a "like". Is that not equal standard application? But no such reciprocity from you, so guess you've forgotten it  racing to overtake yourself on the Left by that staunch angry partisan narrow minded bias you accuse me of.

 

The calling out of Pence was a deliberate attempt to lecture a captive audience who had no choice but to listen to the rant. The only saving grace was that Pence tolerated it graciously and explained to his kids that this was democracy in action.

 

I have yet to see some grace and Intellectual honesty from you and an ability to apply equal standards but seems that's lost when you're so busy being dismissive and dogmatic. Even Jing Thing  gives credit where it's due as he has with Pence. Really you've just called yourself out as  fanatical zealots always do. Try to remember your slogan Love Trumps Hate.

 

What you call reciprocity has nothing to do with intellectual honesty. When you post something that does not include the boring dog whistles of MSM and similar code words, any reference to Lefties or snowflakes or whatever the derogatory term of the day happens to be, your posts might be taken seriously. Do you honestly think you provide analysis? You don't. Your analysis is predicated on and tainted by your bias. There is no point arguing against polemic except with more polemic or scorn. You don't like it. Then stop being intellectually dishonest and post a genuine comment and not some piece of click bait.

 

As for your continued hectoring of me, keep at it. It matters not. Your personal opinions of posters are both off topic and irrelevant.

 

One benefit of higher education is developing the ability for critical thinking. You may wish to learn about this. One starts with a critical analysis of ones own beliefs and what has formed them. Anyway, your quite obnoxious history of posting and stalking means that I have no inclination to be harangued by you. When you get serious, I will deign to engage. Until then, I will call out BS when I see it.

Edited November 22, 2016 by Tawan Dok Krating Daeng

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

1 hour ago, tropo said:

The only sad thing is hearing so many sore losers spending hours and hours trying to predict the future, hoping you're going to be proven right.

 

You want him to fail. You don't care about America, just about your own personal feelings.

 

 

 

My post was about racism and prejudice against minorities.

 

What does your response offer?

 

Want Trump to fail? He has already failed. He has divided the country. He has no solutions to offer. His Presidency will be a mash of tired, failed and discredited Republican policies on voodoo economics, social interference in the sex lives of citizens and out of date notions of liberty.

 

I think my comment on the preceding post was apt. Yours is not. It is merely a repetition of the Sore Losers comment. Is there a post that you have made since 9 November that does not include that phrase? You are the archtypal Sore Winner. Just won't shut up about it.

 

An the fact that you are not American really makes you position bizarre. Like the other one from New Zealand, you wanna talk about racism in America, then you should talk about it in the American context.

 

I would be delighted for you to point to just one post where you haven't called someone a sore loser. When are you going to get over it? Most of us were over it once the results were called. But then we probably have other things to do in life.

[Andaman Al]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2016 by Andaman Al

[tropo]

20 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

My post was about racism and prejudice against minorities.

 

What does your response offer?

 

Want Trump to fail? He has already failed. He has divided the country. He has no solutions to offer. His Presidency will be a mash of tired, failed and discredited Republican policies on voodoo economics, social interference in the sex lives of citizens and out of date notions of liberty.

 

I think my comment on the preceding post was apt. Yours is not. It is merely a repetition of the Sore Losers comment. Is there a post that you have made since 9 November that does not include that phrase? You are the archtypal Sore Winner. Just won't shut up about it.

 

An the fact that you are not American really makes you position bizarre. Like the other one from New Zealand, you wanna talk about racism in America, then you should talk about it in the American context.

 

I would be delighted for you to point to just one post where you haven't called someone a sore loser. When are you going to get over it? Most of us were over it once the results were called. But then we probably have other things to do in life.

 

 

LOL> get over yourself. Perhaps if you hear "sore loser" often enough, you may finally realize that's your problem.

 

You say he divided the country. Show me an election where the final results aren't close to 50/50. That's what a 2 party system does - divides the country. Now you're blaming Trump for the close results? In every election there's always going to be a lot of people who don't get the result they wanted.

 

There's no pleasing the likes of you.

Edited November 22, 2016 by tropo

[ClutchClark]

1 minute ago, tropo said:

LOL> get over yourself. Perhaps if you hear "sore loser" often enough, you may finally realize that's your problem.

 

You say he divided the country. Show me an election where the final results aren't close to 50/50. That's what a 2 party system does - divides the country. Now you're blaming Trump for the close results?

 

There's no pleasing the likes of you.

 

You have more patience than myself. I got tired of his whining some time ago.

 

Valid points on your part throughout.

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

1 minute ago, tropo said:

LOL> get over yourself. Perhaps if you hear "sore loser" often enough, you may finally realize that's your problem.

 

You say he divided the country. Show me an election where the final results aren't close to 50/50. That's what a 2 party system does - divides the country. Now you're blaming Trump for the close results?

 

There's no pleasing the likes of you.

 

The likes of me? Do they no longer teach manners down under?

 

Again, of course, in this post, you make reference to losers. Like I said, there is probably not one post that you have made that does not crow about the election. And you liberally instruct others to get over it.

 

I know from experience that arguing with some Australians is pointless. I will say however that your comment on 50/50 demonstrates that you have no understanding of how the different branches of US government works. There are essential traditions around the Presidency that emerged because of the way in which the Constitution separates powers. One of those traditions is that the President represents all citizens. Trump does not. Trump will not. Trump can not. This is the nature of the division. Not some silly electoral count that is irrelevant the second after the vote is called.

 

Happy to discuss further if and when you get a clue and are not just spraying around your perceived and vicarious victory. The likes of who?

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

4 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

You have more patience than myself. I got tired of his whining some time ago.

 

Valid points on your part throughout.

 

Back to the sand pit. Let's gang up on someone we don't like. Talk about him while he is still there.

 

Well, really illustrates how much BS your endless hectoring on 'respect' is.

 

Thought you manly cowboys look your enemies in the eye. Turns out you just snigger behind someones back.

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

12 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

Gotten over it?

You mean this is the happy you?

 

If you want to understand the great divide in this country then try to listen what those you oppose are actually saying instead of immediately going off. 

 

https://hbr.org/2011/10/how-to-really-listen

 

Another typical disrespectful post on a topic that I and other take very seriously.

 

Posting a link to an article on listening. What a smart ass.

 

What do the people whom I oppose say? Make America white again. Don't challenge my prejudices. Don't tell me that what my Daddy taught me is wrong. Don't make me think. In short, most of the crap you come out with.

 

I am equipped for a lengthy and technical discussion on interpersonal communications, including listening. If it wasn't off topic, I would begin by discussing the concept of reflective listening, which I have found to be most effective in confronting bigots and blowhards in the past.

 

I do not post on TVF to celebrate joy. I do not seek like minded people to justify my own views and engage in circle jerks. I left that behavior back in high school. I tend to reflect back what is directed at me. It is telling that you view my responses to you as joyless.

 

You may now go an teach your grandmother to suck eggs.

Edited November 22, 2016 by Tawan Dok Krating Daeng

[tropo]

13 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

The likes of me? Do they no longer teach manners down under?

 

Again, of course, in this post, you make reference to losers. Like I said, there is probably not one post that you have made that does not crow about the election. And you liberally instruct others to get over it.

 

I know from experience that arguing with some Australians is pointless. I will say however that your comment on 50/50 demonstrates that you have no understanding of how the different branches of US government works. There are essential traditions around the Presidency that emerged because of the way in which the Constitution separates powers. One of those traditions is that the President represents all citizens. Trump does not. Trump will not. Trump can not. This is the nature of the division. Not some silly electoral count that is irrelevant the second after the vote is called.

 

Happy to discuss further if and when you get a clue and are not just spraying around your perceived and vicarious victory. The likes of who?

 

I'm merely pointing out that you come across as a sore loser and you can't get over it> but it's fairly obvious now that you will join the ranks of some other well-known members, who have a similar affliction.

 

Adios!

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

Just now, tropo said:

I'm merely pointing out that you come across as a sore loser and you can't get over it> but it's fairly obvious now that you will join the ranks of some other well-known members, who have a similar affliction.

 

Adios!

 

Another sore loser post. You must be the most one dimensional character I have ever encountered.

 

Do you think about the Trump win while you are having coitus? Do you tell the barista to get over it when you are ordering your Starbucks?

 

What type of Australian are you? You just cannot stop talking about 'your' victory.

 

Crowing about the victory 24 hours after the event is ungracious. What you are doing is downright demented. I long ago dealt with Trump's victory and within a day was focussing on resistance and opposition to his rule. You may keep on celebrating as long as you want. Just remember it is as boring as hell.

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

3 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

My grandmother would have put a little whippersnapper like you in his place hours ago.

 

 

Adios.

 

 

 

Well clearly the fruit has fallen very far from the tree.

 

My grandmother actually did teach me how to suck eggs. We then painted them for Easter.

 

Frustrating that you can't shut someone up here isn't it.

[tropo]

3 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

Another sore loser post. You must be the most one dimensional character I have ever encountered.

 

Do you think about the Trump win while you are having coitus? Do you tell the barista to get over it when you are ordering your Starbucks?

 

What type of Australian are you? You just cannot stop talking about 'your' victory.

 

Crowing about the victory 24 hours after the event is ungracious. What you are doing is downright demented. I long ago dealt with Trump's victory and within a day was focussing on resistance and opposition to his rule. You may keep on celebrating as long as you want. Just remember it is as boring as hell.

 

How can one reply to a  post like this? What more can one say? You've totally lost the plot.

 

You need therapy, but that mere suggestion will set you off again.

 

 

 

 

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

36 minutes ago, tropo said:

How can one reply to a  post like this? What more can one say? You've totally lost the plot.

 

You need therapy, but that mere suggestion will set you off again.

 

 

 

 

 

Very simple. Find the grace to stop hectoring people as sore losers. Somehow I doubt that will happen. It is the only way you can deal with those who reject your dogma. You certainly don't deal with them through rational argument.

 

Your ungraciousness discredits an entire continent.

Edited November 22, 2016 by Tawan Dok Krating Daeng

[ClutchClark]

44 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

Your ungraciousness discredits an entire continent.

 

Topo,

 

Is it true your fellow Countrymen have made you National spokesperson? 

 

My congratulations. 

[OMGImInPattaya]

8 hours ago, Morch said:

 

That the best deflection you can come up with?

 

You alleged Trump "said it best" (well, he got  the best words, duh). Trump wasn't there.

Pence described it differently. Pence was actually there.

 

 

Isn't that what you said before...you're repeating yourself.

[Jingthing]

Colbert has some fun with this. Talking starts at 6:47 and the music parody at 10:30 --

 

 

Edited November 22, 2016 by Jingthing

[Linzz]

7 hours ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

What you call reciprocity has nothing to do with intellectual honesty. When you post something that does not include the boring dog whistles of MSM and similar code words, any reference to Lefties or snowflakes or whatever the derogatory term of the day happens to be, your posts might be taken seriously. Do you honestly think you provide analysis? You don't. Your analysis is predicated on and tainted by your bias. There is no point arguing against polemic except with more polemic or scorn. You don't like it. Then stop being intellectually dishonest and post a genuine comment and not some piece of click bait.

 

As for your continued hectoring of me, keep at it. It matters not. Your personal opinions of posters are both off topic and irrelevant.

 

One benefit of higher education is developing the ability for critical thinking. You may wish to learn about this. One starts with a critical analysis of ones own beliefs and what has formed them. Anyway, your quite obnoxious history of posting and stalking means that I have no inclination to be harangued by you. When you get serious, I will deign to engage. Until then, I will call out BS when I see it.

 

Oh spare us the grandiose lectures from lofty heights. All your opinions on me are predicated on assumptions not dissimilar to your pontifications on who would win the election. Wrong. Absolutely and totally wrong. So you have no credibility left to lecture me on higher education and "critical analysis". What a joke. Meanwhile I will call out phonies whenever I see them. Good day to you sir!

[Scott]

Stop bickering and stay on topic.  

[Linzz]

Of course. Apologies.

[atyclb]

20 hours ago, Morch said:

 

regardless of what trump is is isn't, a free press should bu objective and open and not in collusion with any political candidate.

 

But these constraints are not expected from whatever is called alternative media (especially online). These sources are not held to the same scrutiny and demanded standards. For starters, take the line above, apply it to Steve Bannon and Breitbart.com.

 

"same scrutiny and demanded standards"  

 

what planet have you been living on. mainstream media is controlled by a handful of corporation and it has been clearly shown-documented they do what suits them politically not necessarily what falls under scrutiny and demanded standards.    who in the world is demanding the so called standards you elude to?  the politicians colluding with them?

 

critically thinking people are usually able to discern what is credible and reasonable.   there was a nobel insight and foresight behind the first amendment 

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

9 hours ago, Linzz said:

 

Oh spare us the grandiose lectures from lofty heights. All your opinions on me are predicated on assumptions not dissimilar to your pontifications on who would win the election. Wrong. Absolutely and totally wrong. So you have no credibility left to lecture me on higher education and "critical analysis". What a joke. Meanwhile I will call out phonies whenever I see them. Good day to you sir!

 

The tradition of unity after an election is strong. Many Americans are quite concerned that the assumed respect for the 'office' is no longer guaranteed. Much of the reaction to the appeal by Brandon Dixon to Pence stems from the unusualness of the situation.

 

The fact that Trump won the electoral college is now extrapolated to the point where Trump fanboys require all opponents to admit they were wrong bout everything they ever said and to also comply with the tradition of accepting Trump's victory.

 

I do not believe this will happen. Trump's unorthodoxy means that there have been and will continue to be acts that will automatically fuel the divide that he has created. His tweet on the Hamilton issue is a case in point.

 

So this whole we won, you lost and you no longer have any credibility is a crock. Intellectually honest people who have the capacity of critical analysis will admit that.

 

I have seen a number of flounces by antagonists.  Yours is particularly self indulgent.

[atyclb]

if i may post the below as it has relevance to the events of of today

snippet from historic jfk speech to the american newspaper publishing association

 

"nevertheless my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so called one party press"

 

there is  some great humor in this speech especially about the press refusing to give reporter karl marx a small raise thus facilitating his resignation and going on to help form lenninism and stalinism.

 

 

[Morch]

22 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

 

The popularity of Trump is directly proportional to Obama's marginalization of that same demographic who so strongly supported Trump.

 

It started way back with the Canbridge Police Sgt. Crowley who was called names by Obama for just doing his job.

 

Obama had no place in that local matter to begin with.

 

Maybe earlier for some but that is when I felt the Obama sting.

 

It continued when Obama said he was concerned for Treyvon Martin because of the color of his skin.

 

I don't like racism. 

 

Cheers

 

Oh, I get it...just another thing that's all Obama's fault, then. Right.

 

But do note, that I wasn't addressing the proverbial who-started-it. And even if one earnestly believe it's all on Obama, Trump hardly seems like the best choice to make things better. In the emerging tradition of lowering the bar of expectations with regard to his term in office, even not making things worse would probably be considered a success.

[Morch]

22 hours ago, tropo said:

More exaggeration. It was let go days ago. It's sore losers on this forum who can't let it go and look for any tiny excuses to have a go at him. They are the only ones who can't let it go.

 

He had cordial meetings with Ted Cruz and Romney over the past week. That's a pretty good example of how he can let go.

 

Another good example is how he kissed and made up with Megyn Kelly.

 

He's smart enough to put the deal ahead of personal feelings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can you name another presidential candidate, president-elect or president so obsessively engrossed with commenting directly on such instances of criticism and political satire? I get this might be the new normal, but I also remember it wasn't always like this.

 

Cruz and Romney are men without backbone or honor. It's one thing for Obama to accept Trump cordially, he's the president and that's expected. These two simply grovel for leftovers. But hey...."draining the swamp", eh? 

 

I think your Megyn Kelly reference is outdated.

[tropo]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

 

I think your Megyn Kelly reference is outdated.

 

Why is that? It was in reference to a comment that Trump can't let go. It's clearly an example how he can.

[Morch]

20 hours ago, tropo said:

LOL> get over yourself. Perhaps if you hear "sore loser" often enough, you may finally realize that's your problem.

 

You say he divided the country. Show me an election where the final results aren't close to 50/50. That's what a 2 party system does - divides the country. Now you're blaming Trump for the close results? In every election there's always going to be a lot of people who don't get the result they wanted.

 

There's no pleasing the likes of you.

 

It is true that election results are often close. It is also true that not all election campaigns and post elections atmosphere are charged with the levels of animosity and antagonism prevalent this year.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, tropo said:

Why is that? It was in reference to a comment that Trump can't let go. It's clearly an example how he can.

 

Because as far as I recall, there was indeed a lull in the "hostilities", which recommenced after interviews regarding her upcoming book and allegations.

[Morch]

15 hours ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

Isn't that what you said before...you're repeating yourself.

 

Yep, because apparently the concept is too complicated for you.

Lets try again:

 

You alleged Trump "said it best" (well, he got  the best words, duh). Trump wasn't there.

Pence described it differently. Pence was actually there.

 

Deflect away.

 

[Morch]

3 hours ago, atyclb said:

 

"same scrutiny and demanded standards"  

 

what planet have you been living on. mainstream media is controlled by a handful of corporation and it has been clearly shown-documented they do what suits them politically not necessarily what falls under scrutiny and demanded standards.    who in the world is demanding the so called standards you elude to?  the politicians colluding with them?

 

critically thinking people are usually able to discern what is credible and reasonable.   there was a nobel insight and foresight behind the first amendment 

 

You require standards and integrity from certain media sources, mainly those seen as opposed to Trump. The same demand is not raised with regard to media sources supporting Trump. Not even when key persons from these media sources fill key positions in his campaign and his staff. But do go on about "critically thinking people"....

[ClutchClark]

8 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Yep, because apparently the concept is too complicated for you.

Lets try again:

 

You alleged Trump "said it best" (well, he got  the best words, duh). Trump wasn't there.

Pence described it differently. Pence was actually there.

 

Deflect away.

 

 

I don't recall one time Obama ever left his comfort zone. 

 

Here we have Pence going to a production which is certsinly not pandering to his Base and not only does he receive zero credit. But the membership of that community single him out and lecture him...and all the anti-Trumps give kudos.

 

Pence reached across the aisle and got slapped. Does anyone honestly think thats the way to win his future support? 

 

 

 

Edited November 23, 2016 by ClutchClark