• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Brave TikTok lady survives Walmart in 'downtown Minneapolis'

Brave TikTok lady survives Walmart in 'downtown Minneapolis' | City Pages

Trumpists are so brave wearing a t-shirt to a non-existent place. Fake victimhood at its worst.


BTW, don't tell Trump she used TikTok. She might be excommunicated from the cult!

Well according to this citation, there have been over 400 attacks on Trump supporters wearing MAGA or other identifiers up to June 26, 2019.

Complete list of attacks on supporters of President Trump

This link reports on some of the recent incidents in 2020:

Not Even Children Are Safe From the Left's Violence Toward Trump Supporters

So, yeah I think someone has a right to be concerned about their "freedom of expression."

Especially when they can be the target of an attack from a member or members of the local "outrage mob" triggered by the "violent expression" of seeing MAGA or Trump logos.

Hell, just for daring to be an open "Trump supporter:"

https://twitter.com/i/status/1299938822915006464
 
Last edited:
Well according to this citation, there have been over 400 attacks on Trump supporters wearing MAGA or other identifiers up to June 26, 2019.

Complete list of attacks on supporters of President Trump

This link reports on some of the recent incidents in 2020:

Not Even Children Are Safe From the Left's Violence Toward Trump Supporters

So, yeah I think someone has a right to be concerned about their "freedom of expression."

Especially when they can be the target of an attack from a member or members of the local "outrage mob" triggered by the "violent expression" of seeing MAGA or Trump logos.

Hell, just for daring to be an open "Trump supporter:"

https://twitter.com/i/status/1299938822915006464

Uh huh.....not relevant in this case. She was not killed or assaulted, and somehow managed to go somewhere yhat doesn't exist. Any comment on that, or is the psychological terror of this too much for you?

Also, future reference, RW blogs are not sources. Get real.
 
Uh huh.....not relevant in this case. She was not killed or assaulted, and somehow managed to go somewhere yhat doesn't exist. Any comment on that, or is the psychological terror of this too much for you?

Also, future reference, RW blogs are not sources. Get real.

For future reference, IMO it does not really matter the source, if the information reported is factual.

If I were the type who simply judged the value of information based solely on it's source...I wouldn't bother with this response. ;)
 
Last edited:
For future reference, it does not really matter the source, if the information reported is factual.

If I were the type who simply judged the value of information based solely on it's source...I wouldn't bother with this response. ;)


RW blogs are factual? :lamo
 
RW blogs are factual? :lamo

You are engaging in what is called a "genetic fallacy." (Accepting or rejecting information based on it's origin rather than judging it by it's merits.)

It's an easy trap to fall into, but I see nothing funny in that. :shrug:

Haven't you noticed after all this time that while I might disparage certain sources (like CNN, WaPo, etc.) I still frequently go into their citations if I can to see what they say?

That if they are right, I agree with the info; while if they are wrong I cite from them to show this?
 
Last edited:
You are engaging in what is called a "genetic fallacy." (Accepting or rejecting information based on it's origin rather than judging it by it's merits.)

It's an easy trap to fall into, but I see nothing funny in that. :shrug:

Haven't you noticed after all this time that while I might disparage certain sources (like CNN, WaPo, etc.) I still frequently go into their citations if I can to see what they say?

That if they are right, I agree with the info; while if they are wrong I cite from them to show this?

So you get upset over bias....but cite RW blogs as fact. Disconnect much?
 
For future reference, IMO it does not really matter the source, if the information reported is factual.

If I were the type who simply judged the value of information based solely on it's source...I wouldn't bother with this response. ;)

(the information isn't actually accurate)
 
Back
Top Bottom