Fly wtf dude. Clovis has like 10,000 anti-GOP posts ITT.

For the record I agree that posting it is one thing, leaving it up is another. And people like Clovis are the worst about it because they flat out won't hear the dog whistle even when people on both sides are saying it's there.

For example: Charles CW Cooke:



https://twitter.com/charlescwcooke/s...39013498032128

As a reminder:



https://twitter.com/broderick/status/882958675387854849

The ACist guys could kinda sorta pull off the raised by wolves act because of lot of them really were clueless college freshmen who'd been socialized by the internet and had no clue that "states rights" has been a Neo-Confederate dogwhistle for 60 years, or that we actually tried letting the free market handle employment discrimination and it didn't work. These guys, not so much. Sorry, Trumpfan88's Neo-Nazi tattoos aren't some freak accident. They're past the point of even putting up a pretense, which is really the big lesson of 2016: that Republicans can just toss out Romney/Ryan-style dogwhistles in favor of blatant freebase white supremacy and their fans will go nuts for it.

"If Muslims form an alliance with China" loooooool

Oh, I must have misunderstood you. Let's read your very next post:

Get the **** out of here with this weak ****

What's that from? It sound like Eurasia and Eastasia teaming up. Well, how is that news? They've always been allied.

probably could've done it for years tbh

And yet see how swiftly that is washed away in the fits of raw illiteracy and racial kneejerk backlash.

There is no ****ing excuse, in 2017, to give the slightest sliver of the benefit of the doubt to an illiterate who not only doesn't read the link provided but then SOURCE FOR THIS CLAIM's the Tea Party being racist, AFTER someone provided a ****load of racist Tea Party signs. For ****'s sake. No excuse at all.

And every few days, like clockwork, he puts himself in a position where he's tone policing the forum over issues that really shouldn't be defended.

Actually I'm not finished with you Clovis.

So you've never read ANYTHING about the racism of the Tea Party pre-Trump, but here you are using the word "certainly".

So what did you read to give you that certainty?

Uh, I immensely doubt that myself. If you asked Donald Trump to briefly sketch out like, what office Putin held before his current one, the year that his position changed, and what position he had BEFORE that previous one, he's going 0/3. If the O/U there was 0.5 correct answers the line on O would pay +10000 and the house would still get ****ed after the quiz since everyone would load up on the under.

TIL Palin is from cold cold Alaska where she was frozen as a small cave child, only to later thaw out on the tundra and be raised by Alaskan wolves.

loooooooool, the tea party was an anti-black president movement bro, get it straight

Outstanding point. Guys, we shouldn't need them to explicitly reference Nazi catchphrases before we call them out for being ethno-nationalist dictators.

You should have discerned Clovis's true colors weeks ago when he implied that the worst thing about Trump might be that he would destroy humanity with his climate policy rather than the fact that he doesn't like black people. What took you so long?

lol it's been obvious for a long time that Clovis would be a GOP guy if he was in the states. He has "liberal positions" on stuff like guns or healthcare where canada is way to the left of america, just like every other GOP guy where they're leftish on any issue that actually has an effect on them, but righty as **** as any issue that doesn't. Like, clovis has spent years spouting righty bull**** on oil and gas stuff because he's a right wing hack, and he just happens to have lefty positions on stuff that canadia forces him to deal with.

In 2024

He would be 49 years old

9 years of senate experience

From the south

Army Vet

Harvard educated

Yep, that is the ****ing checklist

It's really embarrassing how poorly this forum has taken the idea that we should be slightly nuanced in our rhetoric. Instead we post unsourced photos of some random rally as if it's a doctoral thesis on the political history of the tea party. I point out I'm not an expert but I have read some on it's history and ask for other evidence. You know, how a normal discussion works on the civilized world. Instead I get a diatribe and name calling.

I'm treated as if I'm Steve Bannon because I argue that every republican is not a white supremacist.

Now the moron sklansky wants to pretend I am not liberal because I think climate change is a serious issue!

Seriously, this the level of debate?

Please explain how this is different than what is going on on 4chan or /theDonald?

And to the complete moron a few posts up pretending I would be a member of the GOP if I were American because I don't think every single person who has ever worked for an oil company is also some cartoon villain bent on destroying the world; I've voted NDP in nearly every election of my life, once liberal. I've been a member of the NDP for 15 years and have volunteered with them nearly every election. The NDP are left of your most left politicians.

So I guess we are just going to name call and ignore civilized debate. So how about you go **** yourself.

This goes double for you fly. You are an embarrassment to the left and not an ounce different than the worst of /theDonald.

Pretty sure skalansky was being sarcastic. As one is never perfect there's always the question of which side of an issue one would rather be wrong on. Fly would rather wrongly accuse someone of racism than believe one can hold deplorable views (or incorrect views, or arguable views, or views for which there is some potential argument against) and not be an explicit racist. Clovis would rather give someone the benefit of the doubt.

A problem I have with Fly's view is that I think it's a losing issue politically, in addition to being wrong sometimes. Sure, tell all the olds and coal-miner-lovers they're nothing but racists and I suspect you end the conversation with them. Fly is very good at spotting racism, and he's definitely opened some eyes, but sometimes he seems like a guy with a hammer who thinks everything is a nail. Fly, do I get labeled a racist for this post? It's like the universal solvent--instead of explaining everything via the means of production and class warfare, or daddy issues and the inability to poo correctly, or god's mysterious plan, or efficient markets, all the phenomena of modern life can be explained as animosity toward minorities, whether explicit, latent, or unconscious.

Clovis,

Sklansky wasn't really commenting about you at all, but calling Fly a race monger or baiter or sjw snowflake or whatever.

Sad. I'm going to chalk it up to you having been in the entertainment biz and some kind of professional curiosity.

If I read sklanskys post wrong my apologies. The rest holds.

I know we've been through this, but I have probably argued with you more than anyone else here about this so I wanted to clear something up. I consider myself a pretty hard line environmentalist, but I don't think the individuals who are part of the terribly destructive oil companies are all terrible people. I don't think cops or soldiers are all terrible people either. I don't think soldiers in the German army in WWII were all terrible people. I don't think everyone in ISIS is a terrible person. Banality of evil and all. Most people just do their day to day thinking mostly about the best way to put food on the table or maybe send their kids to college and a lot of terrible things are done just because people choose not to think much about the impact they are having on people they will never know.

You can at least be honest about what today's slapfight was about:

Still up, btw, and seems unlikely to come down given that she's been continuously tweeting since then...

lol, remember how you thought Trump was a 5-sigma genius because he went to Wharton or whatever? You're so ****ing bad at this, it's embarrassing.

Sorta disagree. Trump barely eked out a win against Hillary, it's hard to imagine him beating a candidate with charisma and competence. Trump's big advantage would be the poor economy and white resentment over a black president. But then Romney campaigned hard on jobs and lost.

Dunno. Populism, or rather faux populism, is sort of a universal constant in America politics. Think back to Andrew Jackson, or to Jefferson pretending to be a gentleman farmer.

In hindsight, I think there are a lot of parallels between 2016 and 2000. You've got Dems competently managing the country for 8 years and nominating a severely uncharismatic establishment figure. The R's respond with a bumbling rich doofus who pretends to be an outside-the-beltway cowboy (again, the faux populism). The R's go on to lose the popular vote but nab the Electoral College, and go on to forcibly sodomize the country.

Well, yeah, but the thing is, he's sarcastic about the idea that racism exists.