Anybody who wants democratically elected members of government to be assassinated is already an edgelord who wants to watch the world burn, and has no moral high ground over anyone, alt-right or otherwise.

leftist: i'm ok with republican politicians being murders because their policies effectively murder millions of people

alt-right edgelord: i'm ok with democrats being murdered because their policies support and empower minorities and poor people. yuck!

pwnsall/disko: i'm ok with everyone being murdered because everyone is equally dumb and bad and my life is fine

these things are not morally equivalent, and afaik that was your original argument.

i don't want everyone to be "murdered", i even proposed an alternative plan that i think is better of some sort of job guarantee program

i care da humans, in fact they are probably the only thing that matters

I think disko more or less nailed it, people on the internet yell and are mean about minor things, people in real life are reasonable and nice and understanding. I think that's the best of humanity to be honest and it would be a huge mistake to let the former leak into the latter. People need to establish more personal and interrelated relationships.

ya I have very little respect for trump voters. and anyone that still supports him are clearly crazy.

its not like with bush where I thought he was quite obv repugnant but I could look past someone supporting him. trump-loving actually causes me to lose almost all respect for a person.

I was good up until here. Maybe on the right, but I don't think anywhere close to "basically everyone" of the counter protestors were internet wackos. Trump's amazing disapproval rating is an actual thing in real life.

We're not talking 'okay with', we're talking 'actively celebrate and encourage'.

I actually do think these things are morally equivalent and that everything after the word 'murdered' in these statements is irrelevant.

By internet wacko I kinda just meant people who spend too much time on the internet and get wound up by stuff, not that they couldn't be relatively correct about the stuff. But yeah could have left that bit out.

actually i just removed that bit

dude, you realize you are taking a wooderson troll-quote and extending that opinion to the entire left? its not really honest.

you serious? Of course you bring up the advanced stats. Hell, even casual stats show these players are overrated. Letting people make indefensible claims when facts show them to be demonstrably wrong is one of the things that terrible people rely on to allow them to do heinous things.

To be clear, these crimes against humanity including elevating Jeter and Kobe into the same tier as legitimate all-time greats as well as providing a platform for deplorables to advocate oppressive policies.

ya all those ppl from that church taht showed up were clearly internet whackos.

I mean, I do realize why you want to think that about everyone pwns. you desperately want ppl on the left and ppl against trump to be crazy whackos. but really its the other way.

wtf lads i thought you knew the deal. you really ought to be super cautious about expressing your disgraceful views in public without benefit of anonymity (unless you live in rural tennessee or whatever)

I would label us both internet wackos probably.

We have over 50k posts on some internet forum, no way we aren't.

God that is sad.

cdl this is exactly why you get in to these constant neverending arguments where people call you a bot and give up. bware just roped you in to explaining it in a simple way.

bringing up WAR and advanced stats when some random at a party tells you their personal opinion is kobe is a top 3 NBA player just isn't a good course of action and is kinda weird

No. I'm literally only extending the wooderson troll(?)-quote to people in this particular thread who seem really keen to defend the wooderson troll quote, or whatabout their way around it.

If the collective response to me bringing this up had been 'don't listen to wooderson he's just a moron' I'd have stfu about it a long time ago.

nope, its 100% the correct thing to do. You don't just let people make 100% provably false statements and nod your head.

If you have someone tell you something that you know to be wrong do you just say "ok" and not correct them? If so is there ever a situation where you would correct them?

(RE: Wooders0n trolling) Tbh I think most people just assume that everyone knows that and therefore don't bother to respond with it

Yes, literally daily for those of us that are not robots

"I like your purple shirt"
"IT'S LAVENDER"

"The weather should be nice this weekend"
"ACTUALLY THERE IS A 40% CHANCE OF RAIN ON SUNDAY"

This is literally what makes cdl cdl

bware jus teed it up nicely

heh, okay. I'm gonna shut up now anyway cos tired of arguing the point.

I'm not sure I could pick out the difference between purple and lavender so I would never make the first statement.

On the second statement, I would never try to correct someone while being demonstrably wrong. 40% chance of rain is still under 50% so the weather SHOULD actually be nice based on that prognostication.

And there is a difference between being wrong on something provable like climate change or kobe being a top 3 player of all time in terms of value and having a different opinion (we should/shouldn't raise taxes on the rich).

Only if you assume the weather is always nice when it doesn't rain.

I should have been more clear that I don't think killing anyone would help for a ton of reasons ( tons of rich white guys willing to step up and take their place, inevitable retaliatory attacks, garnering them more support etc.). But if killing them would somehow actually stop the policies going through with no other major negative repercussions and the choice came down to letting 1000s of people die or killing the 40 or so guys actively trying to make it happen out of pure greed, I would say anyone not out to get them is a moral coward (this would probably include me if it came down to it).



I also didn't think 9/11 would be a big deal at all when they showed us it happening in class cos way more people died of hunger every day and no one seemed to give a **** about that. I was a pretty weird kid.

So that's a certainty now and not a theory? Was Al Gore certain when he said the ice in the north pole would be gone by now or was he just ball parking?