Nick Sandmann MAGA Kid Thread

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Google it, I have no idea why and agree its stupid, but for some reason fringe elements of the alt right are trying to co opt the OK sign.

Yeah, its not as though its purported meaning can't be one, the other, or simultaneously both in this context. It's a rather simpleton conclusion to label someone as "deranged" for at least raising an eye brow here given everything else going on.

It certainly wouldn't be the first time a benign symbol was converted into a bastardized deplorable meaning (eg. Swastika).

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Yeah, its not as though its purported meaning can't be one, the other, or simultaneously both in this context. It's a rather simpleton conclusion to label someone as "deranged" for at least raising an eye brow here given everything else going on.

It certainly wouldn't be the first time a benign symbol was converted into a bastardized deplorable meaning (eg. Swastika).

Look at these horrible nazis in Fernie. I can't believe this was in Canada.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by La Flames Fan

The more disturbing part is who they might become as adults. Let's not pretend attending the March for Life and wearing MAGA hats aren't anything but supporting the idea of taking someone else's rights away.

Opinions like this are toxic and a big reason why we have the fragmented political spectrum that we have today where there is less and less of a pragmatic approach to work together to solve problems. People having different political and value beliefs than you are not by default bad people or mean that they will grow up to be bad people.

I'm not pro-life, but quite frankly it's wrong to make the assumption that being so automatically disqualifies one from being or growing up to be a quality individual.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

I get that lots of people use social media, but not everything that becomes a big deal in the twitterverse or on FB is actually newsworthy.

When it comes to twitter, it's not even a lot. 20 per cent of Americans have active (used at least once a month) twitter accounts. Only half of those, about 10 per cent of Americans, use it daily.

Of course journalists are on it for hours every day. So they have a distorted sense of how popular and representative it is.

https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/...tter-study.php

“Our results indicate that the routinization of Twitter into news production affects news judgment,” the researchers write. “For journalists who incorporate Twitter into their reporting routines, and those with fewer years of experience, Twitter has become so normalized that tweets were deemed equally newsworthy as headlines appearing to be from the AP wire. This may have negative implications.” Among those implications, they argue, is that journalists can get caught up in a kind of pack mentality in which a story is seen as important because other journalists on Twitter are talking about it, rather than because it is newsworthy.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by BBQorMILDEW

I’m pretty sure that Lebron James kids have more privilege than my little half Lebanese boy. Would you say that he has “black privilege?” What about Tiger Woods, are his kids “kept down by the man?” Colin Powell’s kids? Obama? It’s class privilege, you should look it up one day.



Your logic is completely flawed. Its a shame that they let your kind teach our youth.



Disclaimer



*your kind means a stupid person....

I think that’s the point. If they did not have elevated status by being wealthy/famous would they be treated well at all? If they weren’t instantly recognizable as members of an upper class, they would generally be treated worse than anyone white folks.

[Tacopuck]

Today's political climate reminds me of the 1983 movie WarGames, where in the end they discover the only winnable solution is to not play the game.

[robbie111]

Originally Posted by Tacopuck

Today's political climate reminds me of the 1983 movie WarGames, where in the end they discover the only winnable solution is to not play the game.

It reminds me of any Jerry Springer episode.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Tacopuck

Today's political climate reminds me of the 1983 movie WarGames, where in the end they discover the only winnable solution is to not play the game.

I don’t know what that movie is because I’m not ancient, but you’re probably right. That, or really play it, not just from the side lines.

I’ve often not-entirely-sarcastically wondered how financially viable it would be to try and make a career as a ideological pundit. Left or right, whichever paid more, get a few book deals, some nice spots on a news/political network, an ad generating website, and just spend days stoking the fire of outrage.

If you’re going to play the game, there’s definitely cash to be made.

[La Flames Fan]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Opinions like this are toxic and a big reason why we have the fragmented political spectrum that we have today where there is less and less of a pragmatic approach to work together to solve problems. People having different political and value beliefs than you are not by default bad people or mean that they will grow up to be bad people.

I'm not pro-life, but quite frankly it's wrong to make the assumption that being so automatically disqualifies one from being or growing up to be a quality individual.

I don't see the toxicity. If I'm actively supporting taking someone's right to make decisions for themselves away, that's a troubling stance when it doesn't affect your rights in any way. If these boys want to be Republicans their whole life, so be it, go for it! It's not political, it's societal which just happens to fall along a political spectrum.

I worry about fragmentation. To be honest I think we're already past the point of no return, sadly. I wish we could get together in a peaceful utopia and talk about issues maturely, but it's never going to be that way, especially when wedge issues like the abortion debate/gay rights rile up the crowds, while ignoring the real issues that are causing anger and division. (That's a whole other internet forum post...lol)

I said what they "might" become. That's an important distinction. Who knows what their beliefs will be into adulthood, but right now they support a President and movement that actively wants to take the rights away from people when their rights aren't at risk. I don't think that's okay.

[White Out 403]

I'm pro abortion 100%. but I would never view someone advocating for no abortions to be evil. Or trying to take away peoples rights. Just misguided. They really do believe they're fighting for the right of the unborn child, and if you can't at least grant them that then you're really in tough in that debate imo.

[La Flames Fan]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

I'm pro abortion 100%. but I would never view someone advocating for no abortions to be evil. Or trying to take away peoples rights. Just misguided. They really do believe they're fighting for the right of the unborn child, and if you can't at least grant them that then you're really in tough in that debate imo.

I didn't call anyone evil. I said I'm not okay with that.

[Resolute 14]

"Evil" is a morality call subject to personal viewpoints.

But arguing against the right to an abortion is absolutely, unequivocally an argument for taking away people's rights.

[robbie111]

Jerry!!! Jerry !!!! Jerry !!!!! Jerry !!!!!!

[White Out 403]

Somewhere, Putin is smiling.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

I'm pro abortion 100%. but I would never view someone advocating for no abortions to be evil. Or trying to take away peoples rights. Just misguided. They really do believe they're fighting for the right of the unborn child, and if you can't at least grant them that then you're really in tough in that debate imo.

Nitpick - you meant "pro-choice", right? Pro-abortion probably means something else.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

I'm pro abortion 100%. but I would never view someone advocating for no abortions to be evil. Or trying to take away peoples rights. Just misguided. They really do believe they're fighting for the right of the unborn child, and if you can't at least grant them that then you're really in tough in that debate imo.

Pro choice. You're pro choice.

Pro abortion just doesn't sound right.

[White Out 403]

I mean, ya, I'm pro choice. Of course abortions are terrible when they happen.

[BBQorMILDEW]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I think that’s the point. If they did not have elevated status by being wealthy/famous would they be treated well at all? If they weren’t instantly recognizable as members of an upper class, they would generally be treated worse than anyone white folks.

Did Trailer Trash white people suddenly become extinct?

Name one law that has Systematic Racism? Name one law that keeps black people from being anything that they want to be?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

hahahahahahaha. Oh boy. This thread has jumped the shark.

I think this is a microcosm of everything that is wrong with political discourse, outrage culture and witch hunts nowadays.

What matters here isn't logic, reason and evidence. It's about which side you've chosen before hearing any of the facts involved.

This is a big reason why I've disabled my Twitter account, significantly reduced consumption of Facebook, and in general have really started enjoying my time 'disconnected'. Weaning myself off of social media has been transformative for my general mood, as I'm no longer fatigued from being bombarded with outrage over stupid #### that doesn't matter and is a massive waste of time and energy. The subject of this thread falls into that category.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by BBQorMILDEW

Did Trailer Trash white people suddenly become extinct?

Name one law that has Systematic Racism? Name one law that keeps black people from being anything that they want to be?

You must have a very poor understanding of what "Systematic" (sic) Racism is if you think it's explicitly outlined by law, and not how (and to whom) the laws in place are enforced.