From the opening moments Tuesday night, when the vice president strode over to Trump’s podium and all but forced him to shake her hand, she dictated the terms of their critical clash exactly eight weeks before Election Day.
From Harris’ point of view, the night could hardly have gone better.
She came across as energetic and brimmed with a positive future vision. Trump glowered and ranted and blasted America as a failing nation and seemed off his game.
Harris delivered the most imposing performance of her political career. Trump, who had gone into the debate predicting he’d prove boxing champ Mike Tyson’s maxim that “everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth,” was himself stunned by multiple jabs and landed few in return.
At a time when nearly a third of voters suggested in one recent poll that they wanted to know more about Harris, the vice president’s performance seemed more likely to expand her coalition.
Trump, meanwhile, didn’t make much effort to change perceptions about his dystopian intentions among the key swing state voters who will decide the election.
1
Harris bests Trump in debate!
Stephen Collinson -
From the opening moments Tuesday night, when the vice president strode over to Trump’s podium and all but forced him to shake her hand, she dictated the terms of their critical clash exactly eight weeks before Election Day.
From Harris’ point of view, the night could hardly have gone better.
She came across as energetic and brimmed with a positive future vision. Trump glowered and ranted and blasted America as a failing nation and seemed off his game.
Harris delivered the most imposing performance of her political career. Trump, who had gone into the debate predicting he’d prove boxing champ Mike Tyson’s maxim that “everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth,” was himself stunned by multiple jabs and landed few in return.
At a time when nearly a third of voters suggested in one recent poll that they wanted to know more about Harris, the vice president’s performance seemed more likely to expand her coalition.
Trump, meanwhile, didn’t make much effort to change perceptions about his dystopian intentions among the key swing state voters who will decide the election.
The flaw with your logic and several of your group is that you continue to falsely connect one topic with another and you fail to understand one topic versus another. Any member of this site is entitled to posting, even moderators. Every member can come into the politics forum and have opinions and post them, even moderators. Every member can have a strong position and not be bullied by other members, even moderators.
The real truth and fact is that the rules of the site (as I constantly say) are what determine the actions taken here, you confuse the fervor of an opinion and that I do not back down to your bully side antics as if it is because I am a moderator, that is 100% false. There are other members here who do not allow your group to attack and bully them, there are members who stick up for other members when your group attacks them and it isnt just me. Ive been on this site a long long time and plenty of it was before I was a moderator and back before that time I was no different. I always stand up against bullies and thugs it is just my personality and yet you TRY to connect two things and you are incorrect in doing so.
I regularly verbally express my opinions on bully tactics WITHOUT boxing, I regularly express a dissenting opinion on lies and inaccuracies WITHOUT boxing. The only singular time I box is when a member breaks the rules, that is the single time.
Last thing, the measure of my approach is seen every single day in this forum and outside the politics forum, there is distinctly one side in this area which has an enormous differential in personal member to member bullying and attacks, there is even a larger percentage differential of members IN the politics forum that have gone OUT of the forum and stalked/harassed others from the political forum from your group. The reason why there has to be a strong position here is because your group forces the issue, your group cannot avoid the member to member infractions and from not stalking others into different sections of the site. The sole reason why a mod has to be strong in here is because one group breaks the rules and infects other areas of the site with their disdain for the other group. If you or any of your other group associates want less engagement from a boxing perspective then quit breaking the rules. It is funny how several of the most regular whiners about moderators are the same members who have a history of attacking, stalking, harassing and breaking the rules, the ones who complain the most are those breaking the rules the most.
3
@StumpTownStu
The flaw with your logic and several of your group is that you continue to falsely connect one topic with another and you fail to understand one topic versus another. Any member of this site is entitled to posting, even moderators. Every member can come into the politics forum and have opinions and post them, even moderators. Every member can have a strong position and not be bullied by other members, even moderators.
The real truth and fact is that the rules of the site (as I constantly say) are what determine the actions taken here, you confuse the fervor of an opinion and that I do not back down to your bully side antics as if it is because I am a moderator, that is 100% false. There are other members here who do not allow your group to attack and bully them, there are members who stick up for other members when your group attacks them and it isnt just me. Ive been on this site a long long time and plenty of it was before I was a moderator and back before that time I was no different. I always stand up against bullies and thugs it is just my personality and yet you TRY to connect two things and you are incorrect in doing so.
I regularly verbally express my opinions on bully tactics WITHOUT boxing, I regularly express a dissenting opinion on lies and inaccuracies WITHOUT boxing. The only singular time I box is when a member breaks the rules, that is the single time.
Last thing, the measure of my approach is seen every single day in this forum and outside the politics forum, there is distinctly one side in this area which has an enormous differential in personal member to member bullying and attacks, there is even a larger percentage differential of members IN the politics forum that have gone OUT of the forum and stalked/harassed others from the political forum from your group. The reason why there has to be a strong position here is because your group forces the issue, your group cannot avoid the member to member infractions and from not stalking others into different sections of the site. The sole reason why a mod has to be strong in here is because one group breaks the rules and infects other areas of the site with their disdain for the other group. If you or any of your other group associates want less engagement from a boxing perspective then quit breaking the rules. It is funny how several of the most regular whiners about moderators are the same members who have a history of attacking, stalking, harassing and breaking the rules, the ones who complain the most are those breaking the rules the most.
The next time someone goes to their doctor and the receptionist ask's you for your insurance information.Just tell her you don't have insurance,but you do have a concept of a plan to get insurance,and see where that gets you.
1
The next time someone goes to their doctor and the receptionist ask's you for your insurance information.Just tell her you don't have insurance,but you do have a concept of a plan to get insurance,and see where that gets you.
wallstreet you keep saying “ your group “ to Stu . He has repeatedly stated many times over that he sometimes favors the Right side and other times he prefers things or ideology passed by the Left . He said he doesn’t completely affiliate himself with one or the other . I think that could be a cause for there being a disconnect between the both of you . I also stated this exact same fact to you as well . I’d hate for there to be any animosity over a miscommunication that is so trivial . Thanks . Just trying to help the forum be the best that it can be .
wallstreetcappers craps in his draws and pees fuckin backwards from his vaj with a squirt.
2
wallstreet you keep saying “ your group “ to Stu . He has repeatedly stated many times over that he sometimes favors the Right side and other times he prefers things or ideology passed by the Left . He said he doesn’t completely affiliate himself with one or the other . I think that could be a cause for there being a disconnect between the both of you . I also stated this exact same fact to you as well . I’d hate for there to be any animosity over a miscommunication that is so trivial . Thanks . Just trying to help the forum be the best that it can be .
wallstreet you keep saying “ your group “ to Stu . He has repeatedly stated many times over that he sometimes favors the Right side and other times he prefers things or ideology passed by the Left . He said he doesn’t completely affiliate himself with one or the other . I think that could be a cause for there being a disconnect between the both of you . I also stated this exact same fact to you as well . I’d hate for there to be any animosity over a miscommunication that is so trivial . Thanks . Just trying to help the forum be the best that it can be .
He doesn't care...I have also said something to this effect many times but most are too thick headed to differentiate between the two..it's just much easier for those people to lump you into a group with everyone else and a category because it's an easier narrative even if completely false...they simply don't care because in reality there side just doesn't know how to respond to someone who takes on neither the role of the democrat or Republican as a full blown concept...they have no ability to process so it is easier to lump you as either left or right or if you don't like as they like then you are against them and must be right...
I agree with Stu, and in actuality, most likely every citizen falls within the same guidelines whereas they may like a little of both the right ideals and left ideals and that is because we are simply human...this is why the separation makes no sense...it's like religion...you would be hard pressed to find an individual that can adhere to all facets of just one religion when some are strict...I mean to a "T" in all values...as a human it is almost impossible to do so...same applies to political affiliation...lumping people into a category only fits the agenda of those people who make this claim and unfortunately, this claim is made far too often in here...stop lumping people together as it makes your argument weak...look at individuals for who they are, individuals...leave it at that...
COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
0
Quote Originally Posted by spockgato:
wallstreet you keep saying “ your group “ to Stu . He has repeatedly stated many times over that he sometimes favors the Right side and other times he prefers things or ideology passed by the Left . He said he doesn’t completely affiliate himself with one or the other . I think that could be a cause for there being a disconnect between the both of you . I also stated this exact same fact to you as well . I’d hate for there to be any animosity over a miscommunication that is so trivial . Thanks . Just trying to help the forum be the best that it can be .
He doesn't care...I have also said something to this effect many times but most are too thick headed to differentiate between the two..it's just much easier for those people to lump you into a group with everyone else and a category because it's an easier narrative even if completely false...they simply don't care because in reality there side just doesn't know how to respond to someone who takes on neither the role of the democrat or Republican as a full blown concept...they have no ability to process so it is easier to lump you as either left or right or if you don't like as they like then you are against them and must be right...
I agree with Stu, and in actuality, most likely every citizen falls within the same guidelines whereas they may like a little of both the right ideals and left ideals and that is because we are simply human...this is why the separation makes no sense...it's like religion...you would be hard pressed to find an individual that can adhere to all facets of just one religion when some are strict...I mean to a "T" in all values...as a human it is almost impossible to do so...same applies to political affiliation...lumping people into a category only fits the agenda of those people who make this claim and unfortunately, this claim is made far too often in here...stop lumping people together as it makes your argument weak...look at individuals for who they are, individuals...leave it at that...
Pay attention then instead of drawing conclusions...I never once said RIGHT in my message, that was you and not me. HIS group is also your group, I defined the term quite well in my reply and I have defined the term 100 times in the past. If you want to see right v left you will and in your case that is how you see it.
3
@spockgato
Pay attention then instead of drawing conclusions...I never once said RIGHT in my message, that was you and not me. HIS group is also your group, I defined the term quite well in my reply and I have defined the term 100 times in the past. If you want to see right v left you will and in your case that is how you see it.
I don’t put myself in any group . I’m like Squiggy’s friend , I’m the Lone Wolf . I’m not in any group whether you’re inferring the cool guys or the squares either . Nor the silent ones versus the “ so called troublemakers “ . I think you understand quite well what kind of person I am regardless of all the disparaging remarks that you’ve made against me . I’ve written enough about civility and camaraderie to fill out and finish the lost pages of the Dead Sea Scrolls . I can see you are a decent human yet we disagree on some things but no matter what I can say that about you . Is that endeavor too difficult of a task for you to partake in friend ? Consider the olive branch extended .
wallstreetcappers craps in his draws and pees fuckin backwards from his vaj with a squirt.
0
I don’t put myself in any group . I’m like Squiggy’s friend , I’m the Lone Wolf . I’m not in any group whether you’re inferring the cool guys or the squares either . Nor the silent ones versus the “ so called troublemakers “ . I think you understand quite well what kind of person I am regardless of all the disparaging remarks that you’ve made against me . I’ve written enough about civility and camaraderie to fill out and finish the lost pages of the Dead Sea Scrolls . I can see you are a decent human yet we disagree on some things but no matter what I can say that about you . Is that endeavor too difficult of a task for you to partake in friend ? Consider the olive branch extended .
The next time someone goes to their doctor and the receptionist ask's you for your insurance information.Just tell her you don't have insurance,but you do have a concept of a plan to get insurance,and see where that gets you.
Now that's funny!
0
Quote Originally Posted by MrWhatsItToYa:
The next time someone goes to their doctor and the receptionist ask's you for your insurance information.Just tell her you don't have insurance,but you do have a concept of a plan to get insurance,and see where that gets you.
I agree with most of what you said. I can have a decent conversation with all but a couple in here & that's my choice. I don't need a Moderator to control my actions/words. In most cases, right from left can be very easily identified.
Personally & from experience in this forum, I can name at least 5 or 6 that are clearly Independents. It's not real hard to figure out.
Those banned have been warned multiple times as kc mentioned in another thread. You're here because you enjoy the interaction & if you want to stay here, I wouldn't be breaking any moderator's balls so to speak. We know how to tweak each other & sometimes we go overboard & it's pointed out by the moderators.The rules are not that difficult to follow.
Just sayin....
4
@ABooksNightmare
I agree with most of what you said. I can have a decent conversation with all but a couple in here & that's my choice. I don't need a Moderator to control my actions/words. In most cases, right from left can be very easily identified.
Personally & from experience in this forum, I can name at least 5 or 6 that are clearly Independents. It's not real hard to figure out.
Those banned have been warned multiple times as kc mentioned in another thread. You're here because you enjoy the interaction & if you want to stay here, I wouldn't be breaking any moderator's balls so to speak. We know how to tweak each other & sometimes we go overboard & it's pointed out by the moderators.The rules are not that difficult to follow.
Tomorrow on fox news trump will come out with a blown up photograph of some migrant family in Ohio sitting at the dinner table.And on the table will be a picture drawn on it with his magic path changing hurricane marker,of a drawing of a rottweiler laying on the platter with an apple in it's mouth.Then trump and hannity will be on there screaming "See we told you they were eating dogs".
4
Tomorrow on fox news trump will come out with a blown up photograph of some migrant family in Ohio sitting at the dinner table.And on the table will be a picture drawn on it with his magic path changing hurricane marker,of a drawing of a rottweiler laying on the platter with an apple in it's mouth.Then trump and hannity will be on there screaming "See we told you they were eating dogs".
Tomorrow on fox news trump will come out with a blown up photograph of some migrant family in Ohio sitting at the dinner table.And on the table will be a picture drawn on it with his magic path changing hurricane marker,of a drawing of a rottweiler laying on the platter with an apple in it's mouth.Then trump and hannity will be on there screaming "See we told you they were eating dogs".
Exactly!
3
Quote Originally Posted by MrWhatsItToYa:
Tomorrow on fox news trump will come out with a blown up photograph of some migrant family in Ohio sitting at the dinner table.And on the table will be a picture drawn on it with his magic path changing hurricane marker,of a drawing of a rottweiler laying on the platter with an apple in it's mouth.Then trump and hannity will be on there screaming "See we told you they were eating dogs".
There was a lady arrested for eating a cat. It just was not in Springfield, but rather Canton. And, she was not Haitian, but an American citizen.
She is still incarcerated with charges...odds are it will be because she was protesting that the Hall of Fame game was cancelled due to inclement weather...people of Canton really get up for that, but the details of this case have not been disclosed but there is body cam footage of the arrest...
So, partially correct in that someone was caught eating a cat...just wrong place and not an immigrant...she looked a bit off in the body cam footage though...I wouldn't let her near animal shelter just yet...
COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
0
There was a lady arrested for eating a cat. It just was not in Springfield, but rather Canton. And, she was not Haitian, but an American citizen.
She is still incarcerated with charges...odds are it will be because she was protesting that the Hall of Fame game was cancelled due to inclement weather...people of Canton really get up for that, but the details of this case have not been disclosed but there is body cam footage of the arrest...
So, partially correct in that someone was caught eating a cat...just wrong place and not an immigrant...she looked a bit off in the body cam footage though...I wouldn't let her near animal shelter just yet...
[Quote: Originally Posted by sundance]The link below is from Megyn Kelly. Amazingly posters inside Covers believe the Trump/harris debate was legit. More than likely harris received the questions from ABC in advance. Plus. Photos reveal that she might have been wearing an earpiece like Seal Team members wear so somebody could help her along the way. The great Megyn Kelly follows! lkxVEOBfITLY.png (864×381) (patriots.win)[/Quote]
wallstreetcappers Posted: August 20
So lets just clear all this up...
Given that you completely are unable to have discussion with that group and they are inside your head, when you get released YOU are not allowed to post in threads created from those members.
If you post or reply in those threads I will box you, and every time you get released and repeat, the time will go longer and then just an outright ban!
5
[Quote: Originally Posted by sundance]The link below is from Megyn Kelly. Amazingly posters inside Covers believe the Trump/harris debate was legit. More than likely harris received the questions from ABC in advance. Plus. Photos reveal that she might have been wearing an earpiece like Seal Team members wear so somebody could help her along the way. The great Megyn Kelly follows! lkxVEOBfITLY.png (864×381) (patriots.win)[/Quote]
wallstreetcappers Posted: August 20
So lets just clear all this up...
Given that you completely are unable to have discussion with that group and they are inside your head, when you get released YOU are not allowed to post in threads created from those members.
If you post or reply in those threads I will box you, and every time you get released and repeat, the time will go longer and then just an outright ban!
There was a lady arrested for eating a cat. It just was not in Springfield, but rather Canton. And, she was not Haitian, but an American citizen. She is still incarcerated with charges...odds are it will be because she was protesting that the Hall of Fame game was cancelled due to inclement weather...people of Canton really get up for that, but the details of this case have not been disclosed but there is body cam footage of the arrest... So, partially correct in that someone was caught eating a cat...just wrong place and not an immigrant...she looked a bit off in the body cam footage though...I wouldn't let her near animal shelter just yet...
So in other words,he was lying out of his ass when HE said what HE said.Gee,I wonder why he got fact checked.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare:
There was a lady arrested for eating a cat. It just was not in Springfield, but rather Canton. And, she was not Haitian, but an American citizen. She is still incarcerated with charges...odds are it will be because she was protesting that the Hall of Fame game was cancelled due to inclement weather...people of Canton really get up for that, but the details of this case have not been disclosed but there is body cam footage of the arrest... So, partially correct in that someone was caught eating a cat...just wrong place and not an immigrant...she looked a bit off in the body cam footage though...I wouldn't let her near animal shelter just yet...
So in other words,he was lying out of his ass when HE said what HE said.Gee,I wonder why he got fact checked.
There was a lady arrested for eating a cat. It just was not in Springfield, but rather Canton. And, she was not Haitian, but an American citizen. She is still incarcerated with charges...odds are it will be because she was protesting that the Hall of Fame game was cancelled due to inclement weather...people of Canton really get up for that, but the details of this case have not been disclosed but there is body cam footage of the arrest... So, partially correct in that someone was caught eating a cat...just wrong place and not an immigrant...she looked a bit off in the body cam footage though...I wouldn't let her near animal shelter just yet...
Ya,but you could say the same thing if there was a video of a migrant eating a piece of f*ckin chicken.Oh look it there,he was partially right,there is a migrant eating.Doesn't change the fact that what trump said the story was,was a complete f*ckin lie.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare:
There was a lady arrested for eating a cat. It just was not in Springfield, but rather Canton. And, she was not Haitian, but an American citizen. She is still incarcerated with charges...odds are it will be because she was protesting that the Hall of Fame game was cancelled due to inclement weather...people of Canton really get up for that, but the details of this case have not been disclosed but there is body cam footage of the arrest... So, partially correct in that someone was caught eating a cat...just wrong place and not an immigrant...she looked a bit off in the body cam footage though...I wouldn't let her near animal shelter just yet...
Ya,but you could say the same thing if there was a video of a migrant eating a piece of f*ckin chicken.Oh look it there,he was partially right,there is a migrant eating.Doesn't change the fact that what trump said the story was,was a complete f*ckin lie.
Let's not get it twisted. He was partially correct in that someone was eating a pet or an animal such as a dog or a cat. That seems to be fact according to witnesses and body cam footage. I wouldn't lump it into your Tyler's chicken but the truth is that it is not inaccurate to state that there are people in Ohio, or person, eating cats. That is an accurate statement. The rest is false, however. Just take the facts as what they are based on the body cam footage and witnesses that can be heard on that body cam footage. Either way, it's fowl. No need to spin it anymore than that. One factual comment and the rest off base and not true. It is what it is.
Trump's both a wing and a breast piece and definitely extra crispy
COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
0
Let's not get it twisted. He was partially correct in that someone was eating a pet or an animal such as a dog or a cat. That seems to be fact according to witnesses and body cam footage. I wouldn't lump it into your Tyler's chicken but the truth is that it is not inaccurate to state that there are people in Ohio, or person, eating cats. That is an accurate statement. The rest is false, however. Just take the facts as what they are based on the body cam footage and witnesses that can be heard on that body cam footage. Either way, it's fowl. No need to spin it anymore than that. One factual comment and the rest off base and not true. It is what it is.
Trump's both a wing and a breast piece and definitely extra crispy
@StumpTownStu The flaw with your logic and several of your group is that you continue to falsely connect one topic with another and you fail to understand one topic versus another. Any member of this site is entitled to posting, even moderators. Every member can come into the politics forum and have opinions and post them, even moderators. Every member can have a strong position and not be bullied by other members, even moderators. The real truth and fact is that the rules of the site (as I constantly say) are what determine the actions taken here, you confuse the fervor of an opinion and that I do not back down to your bully side antics as if it is because I am a moderator, that is 100% false. There are other members here who do not allow your group to attack and bully them, there are members who stick up for other members when your group attacks them and it isnt just me. Ive been on this site a long long time and plenty of it was before I was a moderator and back before that time I was no different. I always stand up against bullies and thugs it is just my personality and yet you TRY to connect two things and you are incorrect in doing so. I regularly verbally express my opinions on bully tactics WITHOUT boxing, I regularly express a dissenting opinion on lies and inaccuracies WITHOUT boxing. The only singular time I box is when a member breaks the rules, that is the single time. Last thing, the measure of my approach is seen every single day in this forum and outside the politics forum, there is distinctly one side in this area which has an enormous differential in personal member to member bullying and attacks, there is even a larger percentage differential of members IN the politics forum that have gone OUT of the forum and stalked/harassed others from the political forum from your group. The reason why there has to be a strong position here is because your group forces the issue, your group cannot avoid the member to member infractions and from not stalking others into different sections of the site. The sole reason why a mod has to be strong in here is because one group breaks the rules and infects other areas of the site with their disdain for the other group. If you or any of your other group associates want less engagement from a boxing perspective then quit breaking the rules. It is funny how several of the most regular whiners about moderators are the same members who have a history of attacking, stalking, harassing and breaking the rules, the ones who complain the most are those breaking the rules the most.
I've got one question for you before I read this dissertation. Just who is my group? You are literally proving my point in your firsr sentence so i'm really not muxh interested in your explanations about the "flaws ij my logic".
R.I.P. #94 MARSHAWN KNEELAND - DC4L
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@StumpTownStu The flaw with your logic and several of your group is that you continue to falsely connect one topic with another and you fail to understand one topic versus another. Any member of this site is entitled to posting, even moderators. Every member can come into the politics forum and have opinions and post them, even moderators. Every member can have a strong position and not be bullied by other members, even moderators. The real truth and fact is that the rules of the site (as I constantly say) are what determine the actions taken here, you confuse the fervor of an opinion and that I do not back down to your bully side antics as if it is because I am a moderator, that is 100% false. There are other members here who do not allow your group to attack and bully them, there are members who stick up for other members when your group attacks them and it isnt just me. Ive been on this site a long long time and plenty of it was before I was a moderator and back before that time I was no different. I always stand up against bullies and thugs it is just my personality and yet you TRY to connect two things and you are incorrect in doing so. I regularly verbally express my opinions on bully tactics WITHOUT boxing, I regularly express a dissenting opinion on lies and inaccuracies WITHOUT boxing. The only singular time I box is when a member breaks the rules, that is the single time. Last thing, the measure of my approach is seen every single day in this forum and outside the politics forum, there is distinctly one side in this area which has an enormous differential in personal member to member bullying and attacks, there is even a larger percentage differential of members IN the politics forum that have gone OUT of the forum and stalked/harassed others from the political forum from your group. The reason why there has to be a strong position here is because your group forces the issue, your group cannot avoid the member to member infractions and from not stalking others into different sections of the site. The sole reason why a mod has to be strong in here is because one group breaks the rules and infects other areas of the site with their disdain for the other group. If you or any of your other group associates want less engagement from a boxing perspective then quit breaking the rules. It is funny how several of the most regular whiners about moderators are the same members who have a history of attacking, stalking, harassing and breaking the rules, the ones who complain the most are those breaking the rules the most.
I've got one question for you before I read this dissertation. Just who is my group? You are literally proving my point in your firsr sentence so i'm really not muxh interested in your explanations about the "flaws ij my logic".
@StumpTownStu The flaw with your logic and several of your group is that you continue to falsely connect one topic with another and you fail to understand one topic versus another. Any member of this site is entitled to posting, even moderators. Every member can come into the politics forum and have opinions and post them, even moderators. Every member can have a strong position and not be bullied by other members, even moderators. The real truth and fact is that the rules of the site (as I constantly say) are what determine the actions taken here, you confuse the fervor of an opinion and that I do not back down to your bully side antics as if it is because I am a moderator, that is 100% false. There are other members here who do not allow your group to attack and bully them, there are members who stick up for other members when your group attacks them and it isnt just me. Ive been on this site a long long time and plenty of it was before I was a moderator and back before that time I was no different. I always stand up against bullies and thugs it is just my personality and yet you TRY to connect two things and you are incorrect in doing so. I regularly verbally express my opinions on bully tactics WITHOUT boxing, I regularly express a dissenting opinion on lies and inaccuracies WITHOUT boxing. The only singular time I box is when a member breaks the rules, that is the single time. Last thing, the measure of my approach is seen every single day in this forum and outside the politics forum, there is distinctly one side in this area which has an enormous differential in personal member to member bullying and attacks, there is even a larger percentage differential of members IN the politics forum that have gone OUT of the forum and stalked/harassed others from the political forum from your group. The reason why there has to be a strong position here is because your group forces the issue, your group cannot avoid the member to member infractions and from not stalking others into different sections of the site. The sole reason why a mod has to be strong in here is because one group breaks the rules and infects other areas of the site with their disdain for the other group. If you or any of your other group associates want less engagement from a boxing perspective then quit breaking the rules. It is funny how several of the most regular whiners about moderators are the same members who have a history of attacking, stalking, harassing and breaking the rules, the ones who complain the most are those breaking the rules the most.
This a ridiculous post, and not worthy if response. A forum without proper and impartial moderation is not a forum at all. And given that this isn't a true forum, and just an echo chamber, there's nothing of value I can possibly add. You seem to want to assign people sides, as you have attempted to do to me several times, essentially creating adversaries. I won't be a party to it. I will just limit my interaction in this forum. This has nothing to do with and of the left leaning posters in this forum, as three of the most vocal left posters are people I think highly of, one of which being one of my favorite people on this site. It has everything to do with you. You are a horrible moderator on multiple levels. A very insightful, and valuable poster, but a horrible moderator none the less.
R.I.P. #94 MARSHAWN KNEELAND - DC4L
2
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@StumpTownStu The flaw with your logic and several of your group is that you continue to falsely connect one topic with another and you fail to understand one topic versus another. Any member of this site is entitled to posting, even moderators. Every member can come into the politics forum and have opinions and post them, even moderators. Every member can have a strong position and not be bullied by other members, even moderators. The real truth and fact is that the rules of the site (as I constantly say) are what determine the actions taken here, you confuse the fervor of an opinion and that I do not back down to your bully side antics as if it is because I am a moderator, that is 100% false. There are other members here who do not allow your group to attack and bully them, there are members who stick up for other members when your group attacks them and it isnt just me. Ive been on this site a long long time and plenty of it was before I was a moderator and back before that time I was no different. I always stand up against bullies and thugs it is just my personality and yet you TRY to connect two things and you are incorrect in doing so. I regularly verbally express my opinions on bully tactics WITHOUT boxing, I regularly express a dissenting opinion on lies and inaccuracies WITHOUT boxing. The only singular time I box is when a member breaks the rules, that is the single time. Last thing, the measure of my approach is seen every single day in this forum and outside the politics forum, there is distinctly one side in this area which has an enormous differential in personal member to member bullying and attacks, there is even a larger percentage differential of members IN the politics forum that have gone OUT of the forum and stalked/harassed others from the political forum from your group. The reason why there has to be a strong position here is because your group forces the issue, your group cannot avoid the member to member infractions and from not stalking others into different sections of the site. The sole reason why a mod has to be strong in here is because one group breaks the rules and infects other areas of the site with their disdain for the other group. If you or any of your other group associates want less engagement from a boxing perspective then quit breaking the rules. It is funny how several of the most regular whiners about moderators are the same members who have a history of attacking, stalking, harassing and breaking the rules, the ones who complain the most are those breaking the rules the most.
This a ridiculous post, and not worthy if response. A forum without proper and impartial moderation is not a forum at all. And given that this isn't a true forum, and just an echo chamber, there's nothing of value I can possibly add. You seem to want to assign people sides, as you have attempted to do to me several times, essentially creating adversaries. I won't be a party to it. I will just limit my interaction in this forum. This has nothing to do with and of the left leaning posters in this forum, as three of the most vocal left posters are people I think highly of, one of which being one of my favorite people on this site. It has everything to do with you. You are a horrible moderator on multiple levels. A very insightful, and valuable poster, but a horrible moderator none the less.
Let's not get it twisted. He was partially correct in that someone was eating a pet or an animal such as a dog or a cat. That seems to be fact according to witnesses and body cam footage. I wouldn't lump it into your Tyler's chicken but the truth is that it is not inaccurate to state that there are people in Ohio, or person, eating cats. That is an accurate statement. The rest is false, however. Just take the facts as what they are based on the body cam footage and witnesses that can be heard on that body cam footage. Either way, it's fowl. No need to spin it anymore than that. One factual comment and the rest off base and not true. It is what it is. Trump's both a wing and a breast piece and definitely extra crispy
Ya but the gist of trumps story,and the only reason he was telling the story to begin with,was because he was saying MIGRANTS were stealing peoples pets and eating them.I ain't the one spinning the story,trump lied and spun his own story to try and benefit himself.So just admit he lied,instead of you trying to defend his lies cause he got one part of the story right.You think trump was concerned and told the story about the dog being eaten,cause he was concerned about the nut job lady in your video eating a dog,or the dog it self.No,he was trying to scare people about (in his words) the criminal migrants stealing peoples dogs and eating them.Then you try and make light of his lie,"it just is what it is",no big deal it's just trump lying again.
1
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare:
Let's not get it twisted. He was partially correct in that someone was eating a pet or an animal such as a dog or a cat. That seems to be fact according to witnesses and body cam footage. I wouldn't lump it into your Tyler's chicken but the truth is that it is not inaccurate to state that there are people in Ohio, or person, eating cats. That is an accurate statement. The rest is false, however. Just take the facts as what they are based on the body cam footage and witnesses that can be heard on that body cam footage. Either way, it's fowl. No need to spin it anymore than that. One factual comment and the rest off base and not true. It is what it is. Trump's both a wing and a breast piece and definitely extra crispy
Ya but the gist of trumps story,and the only reason he was telling the story to begin with,was because he was saying MIGRANTS were stealing peoples pets and eating them.I ain't the one spinning the story,trump lied and spun his own story to try and benefit himself.So just admit he lied,instead of you trying to defend his lies cause he got one part of the story right.You think trump was concerned and told the story about the dog being eaten,cause he was concerned about the nut job lady in your video eating a dog,or the dog it self.No,he was trying to scare people about (in his words) the criminal migrants stealing peoples dogs and eating them.Then you try and make light of his lie,"it just is what it is",no big deal it's just trump lying again.
Harris delivered the most imposing performance of 
Hot Forum Topics
