Town Quixote's

[Town Heretic]

it was a gotcha question, exactly like when katie couric asked sarah palin about "the Bush Doctrine"

Nonsense. It was a relative softball. The sort he'd taken down town in 2000. I think the lack of rejection after the endorsement prompted the question. I suspect anyone familiar with Trump would have assumed he'd handle it. Now you could suggest that it was an attempt to get him to do that very thing in order to remove the support, but that's about it. If you wanted to be cynical you could say the point was to associate him and taint him, but in that case he also had the opportunity, in the moment, to completely undo the effort.

 

[ClimateSanity]

it was a gotcha question, exactly like when katie couric asked sarah palin about "the Bush Doctrine"

Half of the outrageous statements or " attacks" by trump are instigated by these gotcha questions.

 

[Town Heretic]

i believe the donald's been busy with a bunch of other, perhaps more important (to his mind) things in the last fifteen years

I think anyone who knew enough about both to cite them as reasons he rejected a nomination to head a party wouldn't forget them absent a mental defect. Now if you're arguing he's mentally defective I don't know it to be true but it would make sense.

...just like fred phelps "christian church of homo-hating, sign-carrying and loud shouting" isn't "the Christian church"

You'd have a better point if you'd used Westboro Baptist Church against Baptist Church. But even then it wouldn't be a reasonable rebuttal to the point, which was that Donald called Duke's affiliation a Klan affiliation. In other words, he was being asked to repeat his own prior rejection.

 

[Town Heretic]

Half of the outrageous statements or " attacks" by trump are instigated by these gotcha questions.

There's nothing outrageous or "gotcha" about asking him about an endorsement about Duke and Duke's affiliation, especially in light of Trump's own remarks about both in 2000.

 

[serpentdove]

They were expecting trump to condemn a loosely related set of organizations that appear to be racist that trump knew nothing about simply because boogey man words were uttered like David Duke and ku Klux Klan.

When men are desperate words like :yawn: "Hitler" and :yawn: "KKK" start coming out.

How 'bout the sorority girls (Savage) on Fox News tonight? Will they ask relevant questions?

 

[Rusha]

There's nothing outrageous or "gotcha" about asking him about an endorsement about Duke and Duke's affiliation, especially in light of Trump's own remarks about both in 2000.

:chuckle: Trumps a mess. The only amusing part of this election is that extremists are getting the candidate they deserve.

 

[Quetzal]

When men are desperate words like :yawn: "Hitler" and :yawn: "KKK" start coming out.

If the historic parallels are accurate, why not?

 

[Quetzal]

:chuckle: Trumps a mess. The only amusing part of this election is that extremists are getting the candidate they deserve.

Precisely.

 

[Quetzal]

if the majority votes for trump, how can you call them "extremists"?


doesn't "extremist" suggest the fringe?

You can be an extremist and be in the majority. See: Germany 1939.

 

[Town Heretic]

:chuckle: Trumps a mess. The only amusing part of this election is that extremists are getting the candidate they deserve.

I know people crossing party lines to support him because they think he's the best thing that could happen for the opposition. It's funny, because when the democrats won a majority and the White House then started the infighting that allowed republicans to get off the ropes I posted something here like, "The Democratic Party, making a two party system superfluous since 1828." One of the strengths of the republicans has always been the much more monolithic nature of their ideology. Not so much anymore.

from fifteen years ago

This wasn't what he had for lunch fifteen years ago. It was a given reason, both Duke and the association, for Trump not considering the Reform Party nomination.

meanwhile, your candidate can't even remember whether or not she had been under fire 12 years prior

Quote me declaring for any candidate (Huntsman not being in the running). So Trump isn't the only one with memory issues.

 

[Rusha]

Quote me declaring for any candidate (Huntsman not being in the running). So Trump isn't the only one with memory issues.

It's unfortunate that Hunt isn't the Republican candidate.

 

[Quetzal]

I can't quote you supporting a candidate at this time. I'm sorry.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Quetzal]

actually Q, if you could stop playing town's little sycophant for a moment, I gave a good reason for believing that town will support hillary

he will deny it, of course, as he denied his support for bammy eight years ago

You continuously make references to his candidates with nothing to support it. Not surprisingly, you don't seem to know what you are talking about. :carryon:

 

[Town Heretic]

I started to answer Sod's latest, but really this should be in the Trump thread, so that's where I'm going to post it.

:e4e:

 

[Quetzal]

continuously, eh? :darwinsm:





asked and answered: http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?90953-Town-Quixote-s&p=4640694&viewfull=1#post4640694

You failed to provide anything outside of your own inaccurate analysis. Again, par for the course when it comes from you.

 

[Rusha]

I started to answer Sod's latest, but really this should be in the Trump thread, so that's where I'm going to post it.

:e4e:

IF you made the statement that you were voting for Trump or Cruz, etc., you would be told "you are voting for Hillary" ... so really, I can't see any reason to confirm or deny assumptions ...

 

[Town Heretic]

You failed to provide anything outside of your own inaccurate analysis. Again, par for the course when it comes from you.

Hey Quet, if you wouldn't mind, I've moved my last comment back to the Trump thread. I don't really want Quixote's to become bogged down in any single topic, especially not when it's being actively debated elsewhere.

Here's the link to the Trump thread. :cheers: Thanks. Hope to see you there if you want to talk it over.

 

[Quetzal]

but why do you care Q?

this is between town and me

what draws you into the discussion on town's side, lacking any personal experience of the events of eight years ago?

Because I find your inaccurate, narcissistic analysis' hysterical when you can't support them. :thumb:

 

[Town Heretic]

unsurprisingly, town rejects my analysis of his past voting behavior

It wasn't analysis. You pulled it out of your assumptions, the ones you lean on in lieu of quote and objective approach. None of it was rooted in my actual stated positions. I wasn't a bandwagon jumper or eager. I just voted for the flawed guy doing the cheerleading instead of the flawed guy doing the gloom and doom dance. The guy I voted for sailed a boatload of promise into the harbor then scuttled it with accommodation that was doomed, vacillation and an inability to lead his party, and a string of failed attempts and failure to attempt things that led to my rejection of his second bid.

this is between town and me

No. There is no you and me. The only thing that momentarily interests me is if you have something worth responding to on an issue.

 

[Town Heretic]

what makes you go with "narcissistic"?

Well, it's probably the writing. lain:

and can you explain why you don't see the irony of using that term in this thread?

He probably has a better dictionary than you. oly: Just a guess, mind you.

Moving on then. And wouldn't that be grand...I mean, if you could...or are you trying for a last word here as well?

he will deny it, of course, as he denied his support for bammy eight years ago

I literally, the very first time anyone asked who I voted for, answered the question. lain: Anyone saying differently is just, well, a liar. They will not and cannot quote me denying it at any point.

Because I didn't. lain: