13 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

To be fair Blazehound I believe said he voted for Biden. 

Yeah…

but then he also called him Dark Brandon

tough one

 

2 hours ago, Ipiggles said:

LOL I voted for him twice. I did not go to the capitol, I did not support the violence. I heard no call to violence from Trump.

Funny. The National Guard didn't hear a call from Trump either.

4 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

Yeah…

but then he also called him Dark Brandon

tough one

 

My point is that there are people who rejected Trump the second time around for whatever reason but who were clearly reluctant supporters of Biden.

Politically it doesn't make sense to lump them in with everybody else. And on a human level it definitely doesn't.

4 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

My point is that there are people who rejected Trump the second time around for whatever reason but who were clearly reluctant supporters of Biden.

Politically it doesn't make sense to lump them in with everybody else. And on a human level it definitely doesn't.

but only a certain subset of people call him Dark Brandon.  You get that part of it, right?

That said, I think there's a lot of misunderstanding about what Biden said. He went out of his way to state that most Republicans are not what he's calling "MAGA" Republicans. 

Taking Blazehound as an example, he certainly is not who Biden was calling out.

Biden was pretty narrow in his definition: if you're supportive of political violence such as what we saw on Jan 6 then you're it. If you are not, then you're not it.

 

And I'll say this final thing: Biden's speech was not half as divisive as any one of Trump's stump speeches in 2020. Or even 2016 for that matter.

Just now, Dave Moss said:

but only a certain subset of people call him Dark Brandon.  You get that part of it, right?

I don't take dark Brandon as a negative lol

This isn’t hard. Yes - Biden ran on a platform that included trying to unify the country. And Nick Sirianni became Eagles coach with an offense based on accurate, high precision passing. Turns out both those plans were impossible due to the circumstances. Nick had to adapt to a RB playing QB, and Biden realized that Trump supporters are even more insane than he thought. Adapting to the reality of the situation and changing plans is what adults do. 
 

Could Biden have said "I wanted to be a unifier, but I now realize that is impossible in a world where a leading GOP Senator is alluding to violence in the streets”? I guess he assumed it was implied. Just like Nick didn’t need to say he stated running because his QB sucks - some things can go unsaid. 

Clearly, genocide is the only viable option.

2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

This isn’t hard. Yes - Biden ran on a platform that included trying to unify the country. And Nick Sirianni became Eagles coach with an offense based on accurate, high precision passing. Turns out both those plans were impossible due to the circumstances. Nick had to adapt to a RB playing QB, and Biden realized that Trump supporters are even more insane than he thought. Adapting to the reality of the situation and changing plans is what adults do. 
 

Could Biden have said "I wanted to be a unifier, but I now realize that is impossible in a world where a leading GOP Senator is alluding to violence in the streets”? I guess he assumed it was implied. Just like Nick didn’t need to say he stated running because his QB sucks - some things can go unsaid. 

Didn't he actually say this? He quoted Lindsey. He was very specific and narrow in his definition of who he was criticizing. 

People are hearing what they want to hear rather than what's being said.

 

11 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

My point is that there are people who rejected Trump the second time around for whatever reason but who were clearly reluctant supporters of Biden.

Politically it doesn't make sense to lump them in with everybody else. And on a human level it definitely doesn't.

While this is true, but it is still fair to call them out on dumb opinions.  Which is precisely what criticizing the president for calling out anti democratic domestic terrorists is, a very dumb opinion. Being less wrong than KZ isn't a CVON carte blanche to make as many bad takes as you want. 

17 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

This isn’t hard. Yes - Biden ran on a platform that included trying to unify the country. And Nick Sirianni became Eagles coach with an offense based on accurate, high precision passing. Turns out both those plans were impossible due to the circumstances. Nick had to adapt to a RB playing QB, and Biden realized that Trump supporters are even more insane than he thought. Adapting to the reality of the situation and changing plans is what adults do. 
 

Could Biden have said "I wanted to be a unifier, but I now realize that is impossible in a world where a leading GOP Senator is alluding to violence in the streets”? I guess he assumed it was implied. Just like Nick didn’t need to say he stated running because his QB sucks - some things can go unsaid. 

So we’re running the option this year?

4 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

While this is true, but it is still fair to call them out on dumb opinions.  Which is precisely what criticizing the president for calling out anti democratic domestic terrorists is, a very dumb opinion. Being less wrong than KZ isn't a CVON carte blanche to make as many bad takes as you want. 

I think they can be engaged with in a more respectful way though.

18 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Didn't he actually say this? He quoted Lindsey. He was very specific and narrow in his definition of who he was criticizing. 

People are hearing what they want to hear rather than what's being said.

Dude. When I set a trap for someone, don’t point it out. Jeez. 

9 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Dude. When I set a trap for someone, don’t point it out. Jeez. 

My bad.

14 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I think they can be engaged with in a more respectful way though.

In my defense, I was more respectful than I am to KZ et al. That's just a pretty low bar. 

26 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I think they can be engaged with in a more respectful way though.

It all depends on the purpose of calling them out. 

1 hour ago, DrPhilly said:

It all depends on the purpose of calling them out. 

You gotta be careful about calling right-wing terrorists what they are.  They might get their feelings hurt.

8 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

You gotta be careful about calling right-wing terrorists what they are.  They might get their feelings hurt.

The problem is attacking those few Republicans that do stand up to Trump. Democrats lost credibility when they decided to back Meijer’s opponent. You want to try and bring back "normal” Republicans - then don’t target the ones that actually stand up to Trump. 

6 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

The problem is attacking those few Republicans that do stand up to Trump. Democrats lost credibility when they decided to back Meijer’s opponent. You want to try and bring back "normal” Republicans - then don’t target the ones that actually stand up to Trump. 

But, your talking with a bunch of left wing extremists here so you can't really have those rational discussions. 

17 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

You gotta be careful about calling right-wing terrorists what they are.  They might get their feelings hurt.

That has nothing to do with it 

2 hours ago, vikas83 said:

This isn’t hard. Yes - Biden ran on a platform that included trying to unify the country. And Nick Sirianni became Eagles coach with an offense based on accurate, high precision passing. Turns out both those plans were impossible due to the circumstances. Nick had to adapt to a RB playing QB, and Biden realized that Trump supporters are even more insane than he thought. Adapting to the reality of the situation and changing plans is what adults do. 
 

Could Biden have said "I wanted to be a unifier, but I now realize that is impossible in a world where a leading GOP Senator is alluding to violence in the streets”? I guess he assumed it was implied. Just like Nick didn’t need to say he stated running because his QB sucks - some things can go unsaid. 

Dems be mad the repugs stole their move. Political violence

2 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

It all depends on the purpose of calling them out. 

I'm fine being respectful when I think the person I'm discussing things with is arguing in good faith. You and I have had some reasonable back and forth on COVID and trans issues. Gannan's Afghanistan stance is another good example.  Pretty much all everyone disagrees with him there but I understand his reasoning and thoughts. 

I have very little patience for people who are just trying to shoehorn their agenda/stance to fit with everything Eg Procus arguing for ivermectin in COVID, Abra's pro Russia BS, Zuker's election fraud stuff.  I have a very hard time seeing how anyone taking umbrage with Biden calling out literal domestic terrorists is arguing in good faith at this point. 

45 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

But, your talking with a bunch of left wing extremists here so you can't really have those rational discussions. 

👍

2 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

I'm fine being respectful when I think the person I'm discussing things with is arguing in good faith. You and I have had some reasonable back and forth on COVID and trans issues. Gannan's Afghanistan stance is another good example.  Pretty much all everyone disagrees with him there but I understand his reasoning and thoughts. 

I have very little patience for people who are just trying to shoehorn their agenda/stance to fit with everything Eg Procus arguing for ivermectin in COVID, Abra's pro Russia BS, Zuker's election fraud stuff.  I have a very hard time seeing how anyone taking umbrage with Biden calling out literal domestic terrorists is arguing in good faith at this point. 

I understand the stance. 

I also think there's a lot of people who reluctantly voted for Biden because they know Trump is an unacceptable person to occupy the white house. Which demonstrates a level of objective thought that puts them well outside Biden's defined boundaries of "MAGAs".

I'm far more willing to engage and give the benefit of the doubt there to understand what are usually complicated reasonings than a serial apologist for the orange nightmare.