Trump 2024

I think this thread is a perfect example of how divisive DJT can be. There really is no gray area with him. People either defend every fault he has or have no respect for him and wish he would just go away. As for the discussion concerning this site I have posted my opinion of DJT seceral times and it is no secret I have zero respect for him as a human being. I do not however originate posts bashing him and usually only chime in when I am in a "talkative" mood. I find the opposite to be true for some of the pro Trumpers on here who almost daily post some glowing praise of the man. I really don't care if people have their opinion or even if they post it more than anyone wants to see. Some of you need to go back and see how many times you defend DJT maybe without realizing it. I guess the same can be said for bashing him. I voted against him in two primaries but I am about to vote for him the third time in the general election. It boggles my mind that out of 350 million people these two clowns are the best we can find to be POTUS.
 
I think this thread is a perfect example of how divisive DJT can be. There really is no gray area with him. People either defend every fault he has or have no respect for him and wish he would just go away. As for the discussion concerning this site I have posted my opinion of DJT seceral times and it is no secret I have zero respect for him as a human being. I do not however originate posts bashing him and usually only chime in when I am in a "talkative" mood. I find the opposite to be true for some of the pro Trumpers on here who almost daily post some glowing praise of the man. I really don't care if people have their opinion or even if they post it more than anyone wants to see. Some of you need to go back and see how many times you defend DJT maybe without realizing it. I guess the same can be said for bashing him. I voted against him in two primaries but I am about to vote for him the third time in the general election. It boggles my mind that out of 350 million people these two clowns are the best we can find to be POTUS.
I would like to dig into this a bit.

I agree Trump is divisive. I've been consistent for a long time that I wish he would drop the adolescent insults and instead, reach out to more Americans. He has, on occasion expressed such desires, but then he goes right back to acting the way he does.

Some of you have stated that one of the ways he is divisive is by all the bashing of others he does. I will agree with that as well.

But what about those of us in this sand box, are we also divisive?

First off, what is divisiveness? Dictionary,com says

adjective
  1. forming or expressing division or distribution.
  2. creating dissension or discord.



So by definition, I believe it's a fair statement to say only negative statements and actions cause division. EX: "I like DeSantis" is a positive statement, and would not be divisive to anyone who isn't an a-hole. However, "DeSantis Sucks" would be a divisive statement because it could invoke an angry response from those who support him. Of interest, we have an avatar policy at the big forum I manage (set up by my predesessor) that positive political avatars are allowed but negative ones are not allowed. This is because avatars show up site wide, so when someone with a political avatar posts in other forums, they bring their politics with them.

I have stated many times that I like and support DeSantis, and I am being sincere about that. But I have posted negative articles about him a couple of times lately just to illustrate the double standards here. And when I did, it was divissive, because it pissed off the hardcore DeSantis supporters. I get that, and aside from when I'm trying to make a point, I try to be nice to Ron.

So is posting Trump bashing divisive? Absolutely!! Because it has a negative effect on other Hwy members who either support Trump or are at least sympathtic to him (I probably fall into the latter). As the definition I posted above states; it causes dissention and discord.

I find it interesting that the same people who (rightly) complain about Trump bashing others, turn around and commit the same :sin". Is it their right of free speech? Absolutely! Is it allowed on Dallas Hwy? Absolutely! However, all those rights aside, it still has a negative effect on others.

There was a forum I posted on years ago where I would often get myself into a dogpile because I posted unpopular things (they had a bunch of Godless liberals and jerks there). A moderator there told me point blank that posting has consequenses. Meaning...if I post something that pisses someone of and I get blowback from it, then oh well. If you've gotten blowback from me or another member here, it has nothing to do with forum rules or ownership, it's because I/we reacted to the content of your post. And that goes for me as well if I post something that rubs some of you the wrong way. While Dallas Hwy does ask members to be civil, each of us should also wear our big boy pants when participating. And really, that goes for life in general as well.

So I pose the question to you Hwy'ers; who is being divisive here? The members doing the bashing, or the others? Each of you can find your own answers.

I will add...calling other members names like "Trumpers" is also divisive. I suppose calling people Trump haters is too, and I get plenty of blowback for it. Given that, should I not angrily respond when I'm called a Trumper?

We've all heard the old saying "Mama always said if you can't say something nice, then don't say 'nothing at all". Perhaps Mama knew best.

Time to get busy, retirement is a lot of work.
 
Last edited:
I would like to dig into this a bit.

I agree Trump is divisive. I've been consistent for a long time that I wish he would drop the adolescent insults and instead, reach out to more Americans. He has, on occasion expressed such desires, but then he goes right back to acting the way he does.

Some of you have stated that one of the ways he is divisive is by all the bashing of others he does. I will agree with that as well.

But what about those of us in this sand box, are we also divisive?

First off, what is divisiveness? Dictionary,com says





So by definition, I believe it's a fair statement to say only negative statements and actions cause division. EX: "I like DeSantis" is a positive statement, and would not be divisive to anyone who isn't an a-hole. However, "DeSantis Sucks" would be a divisive statement because it could invoke an angry response from those who support him. Of interest, we have an avatar policy at the big forum I manage (set up by my predesessor) that positive political avatars are allowed but negative ones are not allowed. This is because avatars show up site wide, so when someone with a political avatar posts in other forums, they bring their politics with them.

I have stated many times that I like and support DeSantis, and I am being sincere about that. But I have posted negative articles about him a couple of times lately just to illustrate the double standards here. And when I did, it was divissive, because it pissed off the hardcore DeSantis supporters. I get that, and aside from when I'm trying to make a point, I try to be nice to Ron.

So is posting Trump bashing divisive? Absolutely!! Because it has a negative effect on other Hwy members who either support Trump or are at least sympathtic to him (I probably fall into the latter). As the definition I posted above states; it causes dissention and discord.

I find it interesting that the same people who (rightly) complain about Trump bashing others, turn around and commit the same :sin". Is it their right of free speech? Absolutely! Is it allowed on Dallas Hwy? Absolutely! However, all those rights aside, it still has a negative effect on others.

There was a forum I posted on years ago where I would often get myself into a dogpile because I posted unpopular things (they had a bunch of Godless liberals and jerks there). A moderator there told me point blank that posting has consequenses. Meaning...if I post something that pisses someone of and I get blowback from it, then oh well. If you've gotten blowback from me or another member here, it has nothing to do with forum rules or ownership, it's because I/we reacted to the content of your post. And that goes for me as well if I post something that rubs some of you the wrong way. While Dallas Hwy does ask members to be civil, each of us should also wear our big boy pants when participating. And really, that goes for life in general as well.

So I pose the question to you Hwy'ers; who is being divisive here? The members doing the bashing, or the others? Each of you can find your own answers.

I will add...calling other members names like "Trumpers" is also divisive. I suppose calling people Trump haters is too, and I get plenty of blowback for it. Given that, should I not angrily respond when I'm called a Trumper?

We've all heard the old saying "Mama always said if you can't say something nice, then don't say 'nothing at all". Perhaps Mama knew best.

Time to get busy, retirement is a lot of work.
Let me see if I understand something here. If you post a link to an article that says something like Trump supports yadda yadda, that's good. If I post something that says Trump has flip-flopped on this or that, it's divisive. Is that right?
 
OK....I finally see the light! Trump is the man! He was cheated out of winning in 2020 and should be in the White House now.

Trump 2024!

I'm going to go donate $5000 to his campaign right now.






Notice the date.
I knew you'd come around sooner or later.
 
Geez people, do we not have other things to do with our time? We're basically down three candidates: Biden, RFK Jr., and Trump. Pick one, go vote, and find a hobby.
 
OK....I finally see the light! Trump is the man! He was cheated out of winning in 2020 and should be in the White House now.

Trump 2024!

I'm going to go donate $5000 to his campaign right now.






Notice the date.
Well, no one ever said any such thing. I'm not even giving him any money.

So send me the $5000 instead. :)
 
Let me see if I understand something here. If you post a link to an article that says something like Trump supports yadda yadda, that's good. If I post something that says Trump has flip-flopped on this or that, it's divisive. Is that right?
Only on days which end in Y.


(I'm just kidding)
 
Let me clarify something after reading a couple of recent posts:

Trump is no more immune to critique than anyone else, and since he's a public figure, news article that are relevant and factual are fair game. There are no special rules here for Trump.

The part that got tiresome was the frequent (is that a better term?) bashing, just to be bashing. If he does something dump or makes a mistake, he should be called on it.
 
Let me clarify something after reading a couple of recent posts:

Trump is no more immune to critique than anyone else, and since he's a public figure, news article that are relevant and factual are fair game. There are no special rules here for Trump.

The part that got tiresome was the frequent (is that a better term?) bashing, just to be bashing. If he does something dump or makes a mistake, he should be called on it.
I see you inserted a caveat to that.
news article that are relevant and factual are fair game.
Who determines the relevance and factuality of the article? I ask because every time we posted an article that criticized Trump, you would call haters and divisive.
 
I see you inserted a caveat to that.

Who determines the relevance and factuality of the article? I ask because every time we posted an article that criticized Trump, you would call haters and divisive.
No one, officially, anyway. How many links to articles have we moderated here? Probably none, a couple of spam posts aside before we put joining on approval queue to try and keep the Ruskies out.

I think all of us here make a concerted effort to verify the articles we post, and use a disclaimer if we can't.
 
Well, I’ll admit sometimes when I’m on a tare I’m guilty of not confirming the truthfulness of a link I post. Then again, with the advancements of AI, the corruption of our media, and other geek tools who really knows what’s true anymore. Especially when what you read and see on MSM makes absolutely no sense.
 
In 2016, presidential candidate Trump was asked if there should be punishment for women who get abortions if they become outlawed. Trump answered there would have to be some form of punishment for women because abortion is "a very serious problem." He caught a lot of heat for that answer, and his campaign released a statement.

This issue is unclear and should be put back into the states for determination. Like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions, which I have outlined numerous times.
Shortly after, another statement was released by the Trump campaign because he was taking a lot of heat from women voters.

If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman. The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb. My position has not changed -- like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions," Trump said in his subsequent statement.
He went from women being punished to women being the victims of abortions. Therefore, the person performing it should be punished.

Trump campaigned in 2016 to overturn Roe v. Wade if elected. His picks for the SCOTUS did just that in 2022. Trump stated he was pleased the court's decision left it up to the states to decide how to handle abortion.

Last year, DeSantis signed a heartbeat bill into law in Florida. Because it was apparent DeSantis was going to run against him, Trump came out and called the heartbeat law a terrible thing. So, why is Trump finding the need to release a statement about abortion? The Florida Supreme Court upheld Florida's law, which will put the law into effect toward the end of next month.

Now, this puts Trump between a rock and a hard place on the abortion issue. If he supports this court's decision, it will hurt him with women and independent voters. If he says it is a bad decision, then he demonstrates he opposes a State's right to decide on the issue.
 
Back
Top