Hillary Clinton

After believing that the future is entirely predictable, I've been convinced otherwise.

BCC said:
A complete non answer to what I wrote.

Why is it of any importance to make a decision now? Are you saying what I posited is not possible? 

Do you have some way of accurately predicting the future?

 Remember Yogi!

It's ridiculous because taking a position now in no way prevents you from changing your mind in the future, should some extraordinary event take place. There's more than enough evidence, right now, to decide between Trump and Clinton. All this talk about possible future events is just a distraction from the amazing fact that you can't judge between a standard politician and an authoritarian would-be strongman.

PVW said:

BCC said:
A complete non answer to what I wrote.

Why is it of any importance to make a decision now? Are you saying what I posited is not possible? 

Do you have some way of accurately predicting the future?

 Remember Yogi!

It's ridiculous because taking a position now in no way prevents you from changing your mind in the future, should some extraordinary event take place. There's more than enough evidence, right now, to decide between Trump and Clinton. All this talk about possible future events is just a distraction from the amazing fact that you can't judge between a standard politician and an authoritarian would-be strongman.

How many more times do I have to inform you that I have already made up
my mind about Trump and Hillary - I don't like either one. Aside from
the fact Hillary is hardly your 'standard politician', there are other
options from which I can choose whenever I decide to.

So I will ask you for the last time 'Why is it of any importance to make a decision now, other than the fact you think I have to?'

Unless you can come up with a really good answer this conversation is over.

BCC said:

Unless you can come up with a really good answer this conversation is over.

Probably for the best. What can one possibly say to someone who rates Clinton and Trump equally?

maybe someone needs to post the definitions of "intent" and "decision"

BCC said:
How many more times do I have to inform you that I have already made up 
my mind about Trump and Hillary 

None. Seriously. You really don't have to tell anyone anything.

BCC said:

ml1 said:

I can't speak for anyone else, but trust me I'm not bent out of shape over this.

No, you;re too busy being part of the Dog Pile Dikcs and reminding people of the disaster of your last
argument with me by bringing up 'shred' or 'shredding' every chance you got. TJs comment really got under your skin, didn't it?

Dang ml1, how to you respond to something like this?

It's hard when I've been so grievously wounded 

tjohn said:

BCC said:

ml1 said:

I can't speak for anyone else, but trust me I'm not bent out of shape over this.

No, you;re too busy being part of the Dog Pile Dikcs and reminding people of the disaster of your last
argument with me by bringing up 'shred' or 'shredding' every chance you got. TJs comment really got under your skin, didn't it?

Dang ml1, how to you respond to something like this?

ridski said:

BCC said:
How many more times do I have to inform you that I have already made up 
my mind about Trump and Hillary 

None. Seriously. You really don't have to tell anyone anything.

Not relevant. I have told him what I think several times and we have agreed to disagree. 

No point in taking it any further.

tjohn said:

BCC said:

ml1 said:

I can't speak for anyone else, but trust me I'm not bent out of shape over this.

No, you;re too busy being part of the Dog Pile Dikcs and reminding people of the disaster of your last
argument with me by bringing up 'shred' or 'shredding' every chance you got. TJs comment really got under your skin, didn't it?

Dang ml1, how to you respond to something like this?

By being sarcastically above it all or saying you are FOS. I see he has taken the gentlemanly way out.

BCC said:

ridski said:

BCC said:
How many more times do I have to inform you that I have already made up 
my mind about Trump and Hillary 

None. Seriously. You really don't have to tell anyone anything.

Not relevant. I have told him what I think several times and we have agreed to disagree. 

No point in taking it any further.

Like just there. You really didn't have to tell me that. I knew already.

BCC said:

By being sarcastically above it all or saying you are FOS. I see he has taken the gentlemanly way out.

I've been commenting on this board for going on 15 years.  Thousands and thousands of comments. Hundreds of serious thoughtful discussions on dozens of topics. Some of them are in progress right now.  You may ask yourself why I won't seriously engage with you however.  You probably think it's because you're smarter than me, and you "destroy" my arguments.

or it could be for some other reason.

ml1 said:

BCC said:

By being sarcastically above it all or saying you are FOS. I see he has taken the gentlemanly way out.

I've been commenting on this board for going on 15 years.  Thousands and thousands of comments. Hundreds of serious thoughtful discussions on dozens of topics. Some of them are in progress right now.  You may ask yourself why I won't seriously engage with you however.  You probably think it's because you're smarter than me, and you "destroy" my arguments.

or it could be for some other reason.

One operative principle is "Don't mistake silence for agreement". 

ml1 said:

BCC said:

By being sarcastically above it all or saying you are FOS. I see he has taken the gentlemanly way out.

I've been commenting on this board for going on 15 years.  Thousands and thousands of comments. Hundreds of serious thoughtful discussions on dozens of topics. Some of them are in progress right now.  You may ask yourself why I won't seriously engage with you however.  You probably think it's because you're smarter than me, and you "destroy" my arguments.

or it could be for some other reason.

It was TJ who said I had shredded your argument, remember?

It was you who couldn't find a single 'flaw' in my argument despite being asked 3 times to cite one

It is you who kept referring to the 'shredding' which kept this discussion alive, otherwise it would be long forgotten.

'or it could be for some other reason.' Sounds like something Trump would say.

Were the recent Manafort revelations predictable?

BCC said:

It was you who couldn't find a single 'flaw' in my argument despite being asked 3 times to cite one

Why on earth would I waste my time? Go back and re-read the original discussion in which a bunch of smart people pointed out the flaws in your argument. If you were too stubborn to admit the flaws then, why would you do so now?

I don't know who you think you're convincing with arguments like that one. Probably only yourself.

dave23 said:

Were the recent Manafort revelations predictable?

I don't know if they were predictable, but they are consistent with what was known about the guy.  It was known that he worked for the former President of Ukraine, who has since gone to Russia for his exile.  The "recent revelations" are confirmation (and "newsworthy").

ml1 said:

BCC said:

It was you who couldn't find a single 'flaw' in my argument despite being asked 3 times to cite one

Why on earth would I waste my time? Go back and re-read the original discussion in which a bunch of smart people pointed out the flaws in your argument. If you were too stubborn to admit the flaws then, why would you do so now?

I don't know who you think you're convincing with arguments like that one. Probably only yourself.

Tsk, tsk. Not even one from a bunch of smart people.

Couldn't let it go when TJ commented and still can't. 

I can.

BCC said:

Couldn't let it go when TJ commented and still can't. 

I can.

this is the opposite of letting it go.

BCC said:

ml1 said:

BCC said:

It was you who couldn't find a single 'flaw' in my argument despite being asked 3 times to cite one

Why on earth would I waste my time? Go back and re-read the original discussion in which a bunch of smart people pointed out the flaws in your argument. If you were too stubborn to admit the flaws then, why would you do so now?

I don't know who you think you're convincing with arguments like that one. Probably only yourself.

Tsk, tsk. Not even one from a bunch of smart people.

Couldn't let it go when TJ commented and still can't. 

I can.

Betcha you can't.

ridski said:

BCC said:

ml1 said:

BCC said:

It was you who couldn't find a single 'flaw' in my argument despite being asked 3 times to cite one

Why on earth would I waste my time? Go back and re-read the original discussion in which a bunch of smart people pointed out the flaws in your argument. If you were too stubborn to admit the flaws then, why would you do so now?

I don't know who you think you're convincing with arguments like that one. Probably only yourself.

Tsk, tsk. Not even one from a bunch of smart people.

Couldn't let it go when TJ commented and still can't. 

I can.

Betcha you can't.

Time will tell. 

This could be the most ridiculous thread in the history of MOL.

look on the bright side, it's keeping most of the nonsense contained within one discussion.

jeffl said:

This could be the most ridiculous thread in the history of MOL.

.

thats actually funny

hoops said:

thats actually funny

Yes it is. I posted something this morning, but realized i wanted people to see terp's post first, so I'll post it later. Terp's is funnier anyway.

Now why would you say that? The premise of the thread is simply that Hillary has been treated unfairly by the press for 25 years. Do you believe this is not true?

jeffl said:

This could be the most ridiculous thread in the history of MOL.

this week we are seeing how an anti-Hillary legend builds.

How many of you know that Hillary's Lincoln story was actually, exactly true? Has the media been pointing this out?