I've noticed something recently. Whenever any criticism of Trump is brought up, it's immediately bombarded by people asking for proof, as they should. When proof is provided, the claim will then shift to be that the source isn't trustworthy, or that they're a shill for Hillary. However if there is no way to dispute the evidence, the discussion turns into what the DNC or Hillary has done that is far worse. If this doesn't work, conversation is reduced to one side insulting the other and refusing to actually discuss the topic at hand. The mindset of most Trump supporters seems to be if you're not with us you're against us, and if you're against us you're with HER.
The time for celebration is over. You can't continue telling yourselves that whatever Trump does is okay because "at least it's not Hillary." Hillary is no longer a factor in the presidency, and there will come a time when you need to start being critical of your president elect. Your guy won, congratulations, but now the only bad decisions that matter are the ones made by him.
I've noticed something recently. Whenever any criticism of Trump is brought up...
The malleable nature of facts is a particular preoccupation in one field of philosophy. “Social constructivism” argues that there are simply no objective facts. Instead, every “fact” we believe is a reflection of our socially constructed values, and how we choose to perceive the world. This is not a new theory, and develops many of its ideas from Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche, who examined shifting human values from a historical perspective in the 19th century. But the current political debate offers a vivid demonstration of these ideas.
Freeing the slaves was a mistake.
Very interesting article, thank you
What do you suggest happen instead of the process you've described?
>You can't continue telling yourselves that whatever trump does is okay because "at least it's not Hillary"
look at the self proclaimed voice of reason over here saying we should criticize a man more who has yet to fucking take office
the man just won a race that an entire country counted him out of, a race in which every mistake he made was construed to be his undoing and evidence of his upcoming loss
so yes, there will be a legitimate time for criticism, but as with the campaign leading up this point the time for criticism will come on election day when the votes are tallied up.
Not before the man is even given the fucking reins
They really didn't need to photoshop that picture Bill's so old he probably was around that time.
you are a moron, the conservatives free'd the slaves, while you Liberals were fighting us to the death to keep them. So Fuck off you Racist cunt, btw proven fact Liberals are still the most Racist group in America.
lrn2debate, you fucking nigger.
>pic so fucking related
But can't you still criticize some of the actions he's taken just by his questionable appointments in his cabinet? "But they haven't done their jobs yet" But for any job interview you have to look at their past to see if they are the right pick for said job.
the funny part about that picture OP is that Bill O'Riley actually made that argument. That slavery wasn't that bad and that slaves were clothed and fed
>b-b-but muh cabinet! He appointed all those rich CEOs instead of politicians! We k-know they're bad b-because all CEOs are evil and w-w-we should have trusted the e-establishment politicians!
There's plenty of establishment politicians also in there that we need to question.
Because once you get beyond definition of terms and production of facts, the discussion turns to interpretation of those facts. And since shitheads like yourself never paid attention to what was going on during the campaign, you have few facts to offer.
We don't think they're questionable picks. Now what?
Such as?
That looks like a modern Islamic version of Fox News
>teleports behind you
>psshhtt nuthin personell kid
>slices you with 6ft black katana while stabin your throat with Hitchen's Razor
>shoulda been a rationalist and understood logic like me
OP is a faggot CTR shill nigger
He's not even president yet god damn why do we need this thread every 5 minutes?
>implying that any of those claims are false
Actual discussion. Supporting someone doesn't mean you should blindly follow them. If the opposing side of the debate (liberals in this instance) make a good point you shouldn't disagree with it just because you disagree with them on everything else.
Have you deeply researched each person to make sure they are a good pick for the position?
Jeff Sessions
Good post
Stop crying about it nigger, go back to r/the_fagit and your kikebook groups, like you said the election is over.
Dude you are acting like a complete shill.
>Have you deeply researched each person to make sure they are a good pick for the position?
have you?
did you research the Obama Administration? did anyone? or was he exempt from that for being the first black president? and is trump not exempt because of all the hate poured on him the past year?
face the fact that where Obama faced immense leniency because of his race Trump is now facing the opposite because of his wealth and skin color
you are not fairly representing this presidency to past presidencies
Considering Obama picked Hillary for Secretary of State, I don't think Trump could do that much worse.
Who perfectly falls in line with Trump's immigration policy. You still got a load more to even come close to Obama tier corruption.
>picking your opponent from the primary as your secretary of state
Nah I'm actually an independent I would look at who they picked no matter who won. Hell for all you know maybe I did vote for Trump.
Proof?
> “And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
Negroes BTFO
Sup Forums is a place for people who have already made up their minds
It is a culture of memes, and youre trying to argue with it through philosophy
not gonna work m80
when proof is provided
still waiting LOL
>I'm mad that you guys don't see how trump is literally Hitler.
>muh salon.com said so
He's not Hitler you moron, but we wish he was
You keep proving him right dumbass, where are all of you faggots coming from, don't tell me some hack journalist wrote another story about 4chins and linked directly to Sup Forums
>"facts are fake, actually"
Thanks commie
no its a contrail reactionary space with a heavy dose of non ironic racism
2 years from now this place will be absurdly anti trump
>Have you deeply researched each person to make sure they are a good pick for the position?
Yup. Rick Perry, for instance, wants to dismantle the DoE. At least that was part of his campaign platform. He likely won't do that, however, as Governor of Texas he oversaw our nation's only independent power grid. He also oversaw the creation of nuclear waste depositories and turned the State of Texas into the sixth largest producer of wind energy in the world. He's a career politician, yes, but he knows how to get done the job he was chosen to do, and he's wary of the exact department he oversees and therefore won't be quick to expand its roll, while looking to actually diminish it. We'll have to wait and see how he performs, but he's a good pick.
keep taking value judgments as if they are facts
i dont care
I've noticed that butthurt tards have been spamming here for about a year straight. They make absurd generalizations and erect so retarded strawmen that even they can destroy them. It's been even worse after the Trump's victory, so there is probably very very little that could convince me to have an argument with a libtard here anymore. Most of them are here to spam, bait and demoralize anyway, so nothing of value is lost by shitposting to their threads and by ridiculing them.
Well that's fair then. You did your research. Good job.
If each political side insists they’re in possession the one single truth, says Prinz, then there are only two explanations for someone disagreeing with you: Either they are stupid, or they are evil. But to a social constructivist, neither side is more true or false than the other.
“We’re dealing with two world views that are irreconcilable and have equal claim to truth,” says Prinz. “There’s a sense in which, despite being a rabid liar, Trump is the more honest candidate, in his willingness to push for these causes, come what may.”
The southeners were democrats. Their platform was social security and wellfare for whites on the swear of the slaves.
They wanted government intervention on the economy to sustain their untenable slave-state and their crony capitalist slaveowners friends.
By the pic alone you showed that you either don't know the history of your own country or that you're intellectually dishonest.
Why should I even read your post?
Distrust is so high nowadays that Trump has single handedly pushed us into accepting our post-fact world. It always existed, but before him we sorta believed what the news agencies had to say. After all, who would be evil enough to go in front of live television and tell lies? Us Americans were naive because we thought we were above corrupt journalism.
Then Trump came along. Every one of the people who liked him knew he wasn't "literally Hitler" like the media kept trying to force. People realized that the media wasn't being fair at all. Trump figured this out, then used it against them. Hed ask them to pan the crowd to show how large of crowds he gets, the media would refuse and they'd look like asses. He would go on their shows and make fun of how low their ratings are. He played them like a fiddle.
probably
after he doesn't genocide niggers, muslims, and mexicans Sup Forums will start sperging out and shilling for some neo-liberal candidate just to be edgy
Lol how ironic is it that black Priviledge is real?
Absolute rubbish.
I miss the ron paul support times.
>Democrats used to be slave owners and founded the kkk therefor republicans are not racist in ((CURRENT YEAR)))
History didnt stop in 1964 Spaniard things happened
Humans used to be monkeys and fling shit at eachother
bringing niggers here in the first place was a mistake
not genociding mexico over the zimmerman telegram was a mistake
>Bill O'Riley actually made that argument. That slavery wasn't that bad
no he didn't
>and that slaves were clothed and fed
He was specifically talking about the slaves that were working for the government building the White House
>fighting 2 a front war across an ocean and on your own boarder is a good idea
Did bring up an interesting point about Trump's honesty. If I was going to fact-check then yes, Trump is a massive liar. But just the way he communicated, how he displayed what he cares about, what he is planning to do about it, that's enough to make him the most honest candidate in decades.
Democrats didn't start being liberal until the 80s when Reagan fucked up the Republican party so no liberal would be caught dead supporting them and the Dems took advantage. It probably was the conservative Democrats who kept slavery alive so long.
We are just giving him the benefit of the doubt no matter how it looks, or how the media portrays it, or how the shills portray it. Because he isn't even in office yet, and you have to admit some good things have happened. Lets give him his "first 100 days" and if he has not appeased us, then yes, Trump is not immune to Kek's will. Got it user?
mistaking the forest for the trees
gj
>jokes must always be factually correct
You must be a hit with the ladies
and that is just as good if not better than objective facts
Agreed.
>that elegant damascus patterning
It would have been CNN saying "is slavery bad?" not fox news. Democrats back then supported slavery.
does it hurt your tiny upside down criminal brain roo? Just toss another shrimp on the barbie and keep the dingos away from the baby okay?
Democrats today support slavery. WHOS GOING TO PICK YOUR STRAWBERRIES SHITLORD?!?!?
>bitch I hate strawberries
The right on Sup Forums is LITERALLY using soviet propaganda techniques, then claiming to not be influenced by russia. Switching the subject to hillary is just russian whataboutism and it's one of the most common tactics used on nu/cancer/. Another is to invoke a false dichotomy. If you hate trump's blatant corruption and lies, then you must be a paid shill for hillary clinton, regardless of whether you actually support her or not. This is yet ANOTHER soviet era propaganda technique of preemptive projection: whatever YOU plan to do, blame your opponent for doing before they blame you.
Turns out freeing the slaves did actually hurt them
Where have I heard this before..
>I've noticed something recently. Whenever any criticism of Holocaust is brought up, it's immediately bombarded by people asking for proof, as they should. When proof is provided, the claim will then shift to be that the source isn't trustworthy, or that they're a shill for David Duke. However if there is no way to dispute the evidence, the discussion turns into what the Russians or Mao has done that is far worse. If this doesn't work, conversation is reduced to one side insulting the other and refusing to actually discuss the topic at hand. The mindset of most intellectuals seems to be if you're not with us you're against us, and if you're against us you're with THEM.
The time for celebration is over. You can't continue telling yourselves that whatever Hitler did is okay because "at least it's not Mao." Nationalism is no longer a factor in the world, and there will come a time when you need to start being critical of your ideals. Your nation is better, congratulations, but you are no better than the jews now.
The line from the progressive left here is "dude, we need massive unskilled unemployment from the third world to do the jobs we don't want to do".
considering it was the democratic south, i highly doubt it
Artifical intelligence kills the foreign worker
obvious oversimplification
are you even trying?
The Republicans and Democrats flipped, essentially all of those are "democrats" in your image by todays definitions of a democrat
this
Why should we discuss anything with liberals? They have nothing left to compromise on the political isle they lost the presidency the house senate and scouts and many of the governor races this fall. The liberals have nothing left to barter
A value judgement isnt a fact though is it? They are two separate concepts
"Gays are bad" and "trees exist" are not the same kind of statements.
>flipped
Never happened
>When proof is provided
This is the step that never actually happens though
In my world view they are non sentient carbon washing beings
what is a Tree? sounds like some made up bullshit to me
Glad to know it was just bait and not you being a retard.
I'll avoid the hook next time.
>I've noticed something
>proceeds to provide commie indoctrination research
Garbage opinion and not an argument.
Jesse Prinz, a philosophy professor at City University of New York, explains that facts are always subjective. Even something as foundational as the periodic table.
“When you look closely, you realize that it could have been organized very differently. It could be ordered by atomic weight, rather than atomic number, it could include isotopes, it could exclude elements that don’t exist in nature, and so on,” he says. “The way we classify things is always a function of both mind and world.”
Wasn't supposed to be an argument.
>i disagree
>your an evil commy
Thanks for proving my point mounty
...