(05-06-2019 08:24 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-06-2019 06:31 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-06-2019 05:25 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-06-2019 04:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-06-2019 03:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Notice how I said some and not all?

I also noticed how you changed from 'many' to 'some'? Your numbers seem to drift fairly unpredictably --

You noting 'many' in the first instance tends to tell me that you think the ones that do not are actually few and far between. Which ties in with my comments on your preformed construct as well.

Many is still not all. You really like to split hairs here, huh?

In your opinion, does 'many' mean 75 per cent? 80 per cent? 99 per cent?

When you say 'many' it tends to imply a big percentage. So lad, how fing few of the groups that you label as 'alt-right' dont also fit the 'overt white nationalist' or the 'white nationalists that dress pretty'?

How 'many' "of the alt-right groups .... provide a public, acceptable face, for white nationalists"? You know that 'many' number that you whip out and throw around with impunity. You know, that 'many' who you went to great lengths to respond to with a couple of paragraphs whom:

Quote:proclaim to be conservative, for causes X, Y, and Z, and do not explicitly spout overt racism. And because of that, they appear benign on the surface and provide safe harbor for racists and white supremacists who are gaming the system.

Yes, 'some' is 'some' and can be 'many' -- which you equate. But it is pretty fing obvious that you think that 'many' means 'most' or 'almost all' by brandishing your buzzfeed article about like a ninja weapon.

Dude, just accept what your combined posts say -- they say that you think most if not nearly all do this. At least have the backbone to stick by the conviction that your posts indicate. Good grief.

And to repeat the question: what does 'many' mean? 70 percent or more? Just say that you believe that most, if not nearly all, fit the paradigm that you took three paragraphs to delineate. That is very much what you imply with that effort, coupled with the 'many' that you so conveniently forgot about. But at least be honest about it....

You realize this is your go to move when you have nothing else, right?

You nitpick a phrase that someone uses, typically one that comments on something qualitatively, and then pester the responder into nailing down a quantitative response.

It's quite a nifty move to deflect from the original commentary and focus, as it puts your target on the defensive because they had not been discussing a quantitative topic and you attempt to make it qualitative.

Your other favorite move is attacking someone personally by using made up quotes or positions that people don't take.

What do I believe about alt-right groups? I believe that most alt-right groups (greater than 50% - happy?) were created with the intent to try and mainstream white nationalist/supremacist talking points and positions, under the guise of a respectable, palatable, and false conservative narrative. That does not mean that every rowdy conservative group that has sprung up in the past few years has anything to do with that viewpoint (for example, I don't think the Bundy crew were white nationalist), but there is enough of a stench permeating from alt-right groups that we all should be wary.

The term "alt right" was coined by Richard Spencer (a white supremacist) and he was leading a movement to try to cloak their racist believes in more palatable words (e.g. western civilization) or ideas (e.g. scientific racism, like focusing on IQs.

By the way, before you denigrate the Buzzfeed article for no reason, you should read it. It was well written and very interesting: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ros...tie-mchugh

The issue is that you try to play 'hide the fing potato' with your comments; thank you for fing confirming my suspicions about your 'analysis' and fairly rock-solid predisposition. And your interesting refusal to even note what the groups might proclaim are their issues and stances.

Looks like it was dead-fing spot on.

Please whine some more.

As for 'nifty move to deflect' your comment that moved from 'most', then 'some', then decided *yourself* to deflect with arguing about 'some' was pretty fing awesome. Yet you whine about 'deflection'. Bravo!

But thank you for gd confirming what your stance is. Too bad I had to gd use fing cross examination to extract that from you. Good grief.....

I am sure that Buzzfeed article is sufficient for your predisposed view on the subject. Kind of short of your typical NY Times gold standard to 'the bestest truth and opinion evaaaaah....' though.

Perhaps if you had just said 'well yes it is a preformed construct and I do believe that most alt-right groups are covers for white nationalists, regardless of what they say', I wouldnt have had to to play 'chase the fing greased pig' with your statements, nor would I have had to actually use this amount of space to actually extract that predisposition from you. But thank you again for confirming that your initial comment of many means most -- as opposed to play hide and go seek with the word 'some' like you did.

So I guess we have cleared up that your 'some' actually means 'most', and that regardless of what a group has to say about their stance on white nationalism, you dont give a flip and wont believe it. Does that sound accurate to you? To be blunt you could have said just that preceding sentence and we wouldnt have had to endure the lad-verbiage tango that just happened.....