2020 Presidential Race

#19,102
#19,102
615vols said:
Grown men dressing up as a women, though I find it disgusting, is their right so have at it. Allowing little 9 year old boys to dress in drag and do these drag shows, teach young children all these lies about gender is child abuse and just sickening. All these lies are doing harm.
Click to expand...
And I didn't make a statement about that. What I questioned was the presumption Persian Vol supported it. Damning opinions about people you've never met or had actual conversation with seems overly presumptuous IMO. IF PV has made previous comments actually saying he had no problem with it, then I apologize, but it certainly seemed like leaps in logic were being made.
 
#19,103
#19,103
1972 Grad said:
You are entitled to your opinion, just as he is. Everyone should feel free to express theirs, and if folks don't like it, too bad. I doubt that he is afraid of homosexuals though.
Click to expand...

Phobia isn’t always a fear of. It can also encompass a dislike for something.
 
#19,108
#19,108
1972 Grad said:
When I was in school many year ago, there was no such word as homophobia. That is a made up word to support an agenda of demonizing your opponent.
Click to expand...
What do you call hating someone for living their life differently than you choose to live yours? If there's any demonizing going on, you're pointing the finger at the wrong side.
 
#19,109
#19,109
Weezer said:
What do you call hating someone for living their life differently than you choose to live yours? If there's any demonizing going on, you're pointing the finger at the wrong side.
Click to expand...

Hating someone? A few posts ago you complained of unfair assumptions about people, now you are accusing people who disagree with homosexuality of hating them? Seems to me you are doing a lot of the assuming and demonizing. Disagreeing doesn’t mean hatred.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matt2496, TN-POSSUM, Rickyvol77 and 5 others
#19,116
#19,116
615vols said:
Hating someone? A few posts ago you complained of unfair assumptions about people, now you are accusing people who disagree with homosexuality of hating them? Seems to me you are doing a lot of the assuming and demonizing. Disagreeing doesn’t mean hatred.
Click to expand...
1972 Grad said:
Who hates anybody for living their life differently?
Click to expand...
Go back to the post where all of this began and yes, I think it speaks to hate. But whether you call it hate, or disagreement, or disapproval, it all comes back to projecting your beliefs on someone else and expecting them to live up to that.

How does Pete being gay disqualify him from being POTUS? If you don't like his politics, fine, then attack his politics, but what does his sexuality have to do with it. It would be like me saying your wife's fat and ugly and I'd hate to see her on TV as First Lady. WTH does that really have to do with anything? It doesn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#19,117
#19,117
Weezer said:
Go back to the post where all of this began and yes, I think it speaks to hate. But whether you call it hate, or disagreement, or disapproval, it all comes back to projecting your beliefs on someone else and expecting them to live up to that.

How does Pete being gay disqualify him from being POTUS? If you don't like his politics, fine, then attack his politics, but what does his sexuality have to do with it. It would be like me saying your wife's fat and ugly and I'd hate to see her on TV as First Lady. WTH does that really have to do with anything? It doesn't.
Click to expand...
There are a helluva lot more fat, ugly wives than husbands of gay men.
 
#19,120
#19,120
VolnJC said:
Pete with a blunder in SC....gotta be better than this
Click to expand...

The campaign did respond, this morning:

-One stock photo of a Kenyan mother and kid was used on the website. It was removed shortly afterwards.
-The Intercept's (original source of the story) claim of "42% white supporters in the letter" is not proven. The Intercept even stated in the article that it was their "belief". Not exactly a solid claim. Not that it should matter anyways, white people support Pete's Douglass plan, too.
-Some of the people in the letter circulated supported the plan, but haven't endorsed Pete. Many said it gave the appearance of an endorsement. That is a fair and valid critique of the campaign.

I don't think anything nefarious was going on, just seemed amateurish to me. But it isn't the best look for the SC for Pete campaign group. Lis will get it sorted out.

Ninja Edit: Also, the tweet is intentionally misleading by leaving out some key details.

The source article was worse, and a blatant attack piece against Pete. This is how it will be from here on out, I get that. It is a good thing in a way; they view Pete as a legitimate threat. Otherwise they wouldn't be performing such mental gymnastics to go after him. Just what happens when a candidate has a nine point lead in the gold standard of Iowa polls released last night.
 
Last edited:
#19,121
#19,121
zeppelin128 said:
The campaign did respond, this morning:

-One stock photo of a Kenyan mother and kid was used on the website. It was removed shortly afterwards.
-The Intercept's (original source of the story) claim of "42% white supporters in the letter" is not proven. The Intercept even stated in the article that it was their "belief". Not exactly a solid claim. Not that it should matter anyways, white people support Pete's Douglass plan, too.
-Some of the people in the letter circulated supported the plan, but haven't endorsed Pete. Many said it gave the appearance of an endorsement. That is a fair and valid critique of the campaign.

I don't think anything nefarious was going on, just seemed amateurish to me. But it isn't the best look for the SC for Pete campaign group. Lis will get it sorted out.
Click to expand...
The story I saw said the number of people who have backed off supporting the plan:
3
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#19,122
#19,122
zeppelin128 said:
The campaign did respond, this morning:

-One stock photo of a Kenyan mother and kid was used on the website. It was removed shortly afterwards.
-The Intercept's (original source of the story) claim of "42% white supporters in the letter" is not proven. The Intercept even stated in the article that it was their "belief". Not exactly a solid claim. Not that it should matter anyways, white people support Pete's Douglass plan, too.
-Some of the people in the letter circulated supported the plan, but haven't endorsed Pete. Many said it gave the appearance of an endorsement. That is a fair and valid critique of the campaign.

I don't think anything nefarious was going on, just seemed amateurish to me. But it isn't the best look for the SC for Pete campaign group. Lis will get it sorted out.
Click to expand...
Glad they responded...he has to be careful he's rising in the polls and will start getting more scrutiny
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#19,125
#19,125
Weezer said:
Go back to the post where all of this began and yes, I think it speaks to hate. But whether you call it hate, or disagreement, or disapproval, it all comes back to projecting your beliefs on someone else and expecting them to live up to that.

How does Pete being gay disqualify him from being POTUS? If you don't like his politics, fine, then attack his politics, but what does his sexuality have to do with it. It would be like me saying your wife's fat and ugly and I'd hate to see her on TV as First Lady. WTH does that really have to do with anything? It doesn't.
Click to expand...
You should probably sign on with Pete's campaign to try to sell that to black voters. That's where his main problem lies.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top