Donald Trump

[raybo]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Quick answer:

Find me a single post of mine that comes even CLOSE to warranting a reprimand or a deletion.

That goes for my posts too Mike. You've got friends here and people you like to jump on, that's a fact. Tom gets carte blanch while the rest of us have to watch what we say for fear we'll get blasted by you or your like-minded friends. You've reprimanded, and worse probably, members for posting less offensive posts than Tom does, on almost a daily basis. Why is that?

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

I disagree. it is a valid argument on how he moderates the site. If PA allowed one segment of posters to voice their disapproval and vitriol towards Bush it should be expected that PA would allow the same for Obama.

I'm not talking at all about he moderates the site.

It was in regard to how its okay for Trump to flip flop because Hillary does.

Don't get me started on what some people are allowed to say on this site...

[raybo]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Do you guys really believe I don't delete Tom's posts? Ask him yourself. I've deleted PLENTY of his posts over the years...

Oh really? Well, I have never seen one post from you reprimanding Tom. Why is that? Why do some deserve public reprimands and others don't, for the same type of posts?

Perception is everything Mike, and the perception is that you don't jump on some here but go out of your way to do so to others. It's fairly clear to me, at least, that IF (in private?) you have reprimanded Tom in the past, it has not been heeded by him.

[schweitz]

Originally Posted by raybo

That goes for my posts too Mike. You've got friends here and people you like to jump on, that's a fact. Tom gets carte blanch while the rest of us have to watch what we say for fear we'll get blasted by you or your like-minded friends. You've reprimanded, and worse probably, members for posting less offensive posts than Tom does, on almost a daily basis. Why is that?

DUDE! Don't you know how whiney that sounds? Do you need a "safe zone"?

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by schweitz

DUDE! Don't you know how whiney that sounds? Do you need a "safe zone"?

Now now...

[raybo]

Originally Posted by schweitz

DUDE! Don't you know how whiney that sounds? Do you need a "safe zone"?

Dude? "Whiney"? "Safe Zone? Get a grip!

I don't seek a safe zone, I seek equal treatment for equal actions on this board, and not just for me, for everyone here. Unfortunately, some get blasted in public here and others don't, by the owner of the dang forum no less. The one who should be putting a stop to it, instead of piling on.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

I'm not talking at all about he moderates the site.

It was in regard to how its okay for Trump to flip flop because Hillary does.

Don't get me started on what some people are allowed to say on this site...

If that is the context of your statement about excusing one politician's actions because another does it , I agree is not a good argument. However, I understand his statements to that effect as not justifying the actions of the politician, but more about the hypocrisy of a certain segment, of posters, who see nothing inherently wrong with ignoring the same behavior from their savior while accusing the other politician of vile behavior.

Let's say we differ on the motivation of for PA's statements.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

If that is the context of your statement about excusing one politician's actions because another does it , I agree is not a good argument. However, I understand his statements to that effect as not justifying the actions of the politician, but more about the hypocrisy of a certain segment, of posters, who see nothing inherently wrong with ignoring the same behavior from their savior while accusing the other politician of vile behavior.

Let's say we differ on the motivation of for PA's statements.

Either way its poor form.

You can't rail against one politician or his supporters for doing something like being deceiving, flip-flopping, or lying and then turn around and use their actions for justification for doing it yourself.

Poor form.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by mountainman

Somehow, "I would consult the very best people and smartest minds" is not a reassuring answer from a prez candidate responding to an intricate foreign policy question.

It goes without saying that every hopeful would surround themselves with experts versed in specific areas. But the point of a moderator's question is to find out how much the CANDIDATE knows about the subject.

I don't disagree with you, but I think he's telling us exactly how he succeeded in business. He succeeded by being very good at identifying and hiring people that actually DO KNOW what they are doing and are the best people for any specific job. He see himself as a great manager (strong, tough, bright, and capable of attracting and hiring the best people).

For example, he won't negotiate a trade deal with China with the typical political advisers. He's already talking about bringing in Carl Ichan and a few other people like that. Between them and their lawyers they will come away with a much better deal than some idiot hacks in the Obama administration. The question is do you trust him to be able to do that?

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

Either way its poor form.

You can't rail against one politician or his supporters for doing something like being deceiving, flip-flopping, or lying and then turn around and use their actions for justification for doing it yourself.

Poor form.

If you flip flop on actual policy I have an issue with you (especially if I think you are heading in the wrong direction and know it).

Trump's flip flop on how to run is comically insignificant. He's playing hardball with people that don't want him to win and are probably willing to do some unsavory things to stop him. So whenever they start talking like that, he threatens them. That's not flip flopping. It's smart.

[Nutz and Boltz]

Originally Posted by raybo

Oh really? Well, I have never seen one post from you reprimanding Tom. Why is that? Why do some deserve public reprimands and others don't, for the same type of posts?

Perception is everything Mike, and the perception is that you don't jump on some here but go out of your way to do so to others. It's fairly clear to me, at least, that IF (in private?) you have reprimanded Tom in the past, it has not been heeded by him.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...2&postcount=60

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Nutz and Boltz

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...2&postcount=60

Wow, thanks! I missed that one, even though I wouldn't really classify that as a reprimand.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by raybo

Wow, thanks! I missed that one, even though I wouldn't really classify that as a reprimand.

Yeah...that's some reprimand. "Don't play their game by spouting hyperbole for shock value purposes".

When Tom puts his foot in his mouth...he is just mimicking the "hyperbolizing liberals".

[PaceAdvantage]

Oh my God guys....please stop beating up on me!

New moderator, please help!

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Oh my God guys....please stop beating up on me!

Wear it as a badge of honor.