prove me wrong

[lsz]

I think you’ve misunderstood what I posted, which is ironic.

I am not sure I understand much of what you post

 

[Brookie1973]

I am not sure I understand much of what you post

I was simply making the point that depending on which end of the spectrum you get your news from, this guy is either a right wing MAGA or the boyfriend of a transgender who was rebelling against his conservative family.

 

[manlyfan76]

Nice selective reading skills you got there. Would the fascist stuff or the furry references inscribed be something a lefty would say?

 

[h27272727]

I was just using Rubios X message to satisfy SER8s need for examples ie a small subset of a wider population which encompassed the entire Obama presidency.

I know Obama is an untouchable/above criticism from those on the left, and your “vindications” are obviously framed from that perspective, so I can see it’s pointless pushing that case here. Rest assured, conservatives have a very different view of Obamas role in instigating the current political discord both in the US and in the west more generally.

It's ok if you don't agree with my assessment. But it is certainly not pointless to properly expand on why. I don't agree Obama is above criticism at all, nor did my post say anything about Obama's performance as president. If it appears that way I'd say it's likely more due to discontent over aging presidents and the blatant corruption / criminality associated with Trump (percieved to be unfathomable in previous eras of US politics). I did compliment the nature of political debates at the time. The only compliment on Obama was provided by Republican candidate Romney (to show that he doesn't harbour animosity against Obama long after his presidency).

The below summarises the arguments and walks you through the steps I took to evaluate each claim. Any information I introduced was done so only as it was relevant in assessing the claim at hand. If you want to address particular lines, I am more than willing to hear you out. Also, if there are instances where you strongly believe I demonstrated bias, then that would be good to address as well.

The claim: 'Obama also demonstrated Trump's use of violent political rhetoric to divide and demonise minority groups and/or political opponents'.

Evaluation of implied arguments (A):
A1.1 People opposed to same sex marriage were unfairly labelled bigots by Obama

​

Defined bigot. Identified two viable reasons for opposing same-sex marriage views. Reasons identified were i) intolerance (personal belief), and ii) religious views. Reason i) meets bigot criteria according to its definition. Reason ii) convoluted due to the grey area between religious moral beliefs and intolerance. Considered that even if religious people may have valid religious reasons to oppose same-sex views, the underlying religious teachings are reasonably described as intolerant or bigoted. Did not identify further reasons extending beyond religious or personal intolerance.​

A1.2. And this was an attack on Republicans.

Quote not found to explicitly reference Republicans. Stances on the topic predominately based on religious views as opposed to political affiliation. No group was mentioned in the quote except people 'bigoted' (intolerant to) same-sex relations. Concluded that due to the above factors it is not a legitimate example of violent political rhetoric.​

​

A2. The 'war on women' political slogan wrongfully suggests Republicans plan to take away women's rights.

Sourced a definition on the 'war on women' political slogan. Slogan was not found to originate from Obama (has ties to 90s, popularised by critics of George Bush). Looked for instances of Republicans improving women's rights since Obama. Looked for examples against. Used Trump's quote promising to purposely rig the supreme court to overturn Roe v Wade (1973). Noted Trump's plan worked in repealing women rights to abortion (2022) - senate pushed it to the states. 14 Republican states and 0 Democrat states remove the right to abortion. Touched on the stricter ideas supported by elements of the Republican party (Hegeseth, for example). Concluded that the Republicans did not improve women's rights, nor did they keep them the same. They did, however, take away key women's rights that had been granted for 49 years. Also haven't touched on the Trump admin's derogatory undertones with their rhetoric on 'DEI'​

​

A3. - did not find any information on what the quote was -

A4. Obama told Latino's that Republicans were their enemy

On first view, agreed this resembled a Trump-style attack. Researched the context of the quote. Identified that Obama clarified the quote a month after making it. Obama claimed he was warning Latino's that future Republican administrations will enact immigration policies targeting ethnic minorities such themselves. Considered the merits to this claim based on subsequent events. Throughout 2016-2024, political rhetoric increasingly radical; increased use of terms such as 'illegal aliens'. ICE since been permitted to racially profile. Unlawful detention and deportation widespread in 2025. Republican party removed the right for due process and 70% of victims were found to be legal during a 10 day study in LA (and Latinos disproportionately fear deportation). Republicans ignored court orders deeming ICE actions unlawful. Data of deportation by race/ethnicity is not readily available at this stage, although both you and I would agree that Latino's are disproportionately affected. Concluded that Obama's statement has likely come to fruition. i.e. Not unreasonable given subsequent rhetoric and policy (including policy deemed unlawful).​

 

[Cliffycomeback]

I apologise to any and all who I have annoyed, insulted or engaged in

View attachment 31261

Give it up mate. Even our local media is now conceding that he lived with a transgender boyfriend/girlfriend. He was clearly left aligned not that it really matters. It's a terrible event that has taken the life of a husband and father who never displayed any violence toward others. Sadly, this is indicative of the divisive spirit now sweeping the earth. People no longer seem to feel empathy. Rather they celebrate murder and rejoice at the suffering of others.

I fear things are about to be turned upside down for many around the world

 

[Eagle 1]

It's ok if you don't agree with my assessment. But it is certainly not pointless to properly expand on why. I don't agree Obama is above criticism at all, nor did my post say anything about Obama's performance as president. If it appears that way I'd say it's likely more due to discontent over aging presidents and the blatant corruption / criminality associated with Trump (percieved to be unfathomable in previous eras of US politics). I did compliment the nature of political debates at the time. The only compliment on Obama was provided by Republican candidate Romney (to show that he doesn't harbour animosity against Obama long after his presidency).

The below summarises the arguments and walks you through the steps I took to evaluate each claim. Any information I introduced was done so only as it was relevant in assessing the claim at hand. If you want to address particular lines, I am more than willing to hear you out. Also, if there are instances where you strongly believe I demonstrated bias, then that would be good to address as well.

The claim: 'Obama also demonstrated Trump's use of violent political rhetoric to divide and demonise minority groups and/or political opponents'.

Evaluation of implied arguments (A):
A1.1 People opposed to same sex marriage were unfairly labelled bigots by Obama

​

Defined bigot. Identified two viable reasons for opposing same-sex marriage views. Reasons identified were i) intolerance (personal belief), and ii) religious views. Reason i) meets bigot criteria according to its definition. Reason ii) convoluted due to the grey area between religious moral beliefs and intolerance. Considered that even if religious people may have valid religious reasons to oppose same-sex views, the underlying religious teachings are reasonably described as intolerant or bigoted. Did not identify further reasons extending beyond religious or personal intolerance.​

A1.2. And this was an attack on Republicans.

Quote not found to explicitly reference Republicans. Stances on the topic predominately based on religious views as opposed to political affiliation. No group was mentioned in the quote except people 'bigoted' (intolerant to) same-sex relations. Concluded that due to the above factors it is not a legitimate example of violent political rhetoric.​

​

A2. The 'war on women' political slogan wrongfully suggests Republicans plan to take away women's rights.

Sourced a definition on the 'war on women' political slogan. Slogan was not found to originate from Obama (has ties to 90s, popularised by critics of George Bush). Looked for instances of Republicans improving women's rights since Obama. Looked for examples against. Used Trump's quote promising to purposely rig the supreme court to overturn Roe v Wade (1973). Noted Trump's plan worked in repealing women rights to abortion (2022) - senate pushed it to the states. 14 Republican states and 0 Democrat states remove the right to abortion. Touched on the stricter ideas supported by elements of the Republican party (Hegeseth, for example). Concluded that the Republicans did not improve women's rights, nor did they keep them the same. They did, however, take away key women's rights that had been granted for 49 years. Also haven't touched on the Trump admin's derogatory undertones with their rhetoric on 'DEI'​

​

A3. - did not find any information on what the quote was -

A4. Obama told Latino's that Republicans were their enemy

On first view, agreed this resembled a Trump-style attack. Researched the context of the quote. Identified that Obama clarified the quote a month after making it. Obama claimed he was warning Latino's that future Republican administrations will enact immigration policies targeting ethnic minorities such themselves. Considered the merits to this claim based on subsequent events. Throughout 2016-2024, political rhetoric increasingly radical; increased use of terms such as 'illegal aliens'. ICE since been permitted to racially profile. Unlawful detention and deportation widespread in 2025. Republican party removed the right for due process and 70% of victims were found to be legal during a 10 day study in LA (and Latinos disproportionately fear deportation). Republicans ignored court orders deeming ICE actions unlawful. Data of deportation by race/ethnicity is not readily available at this stage, although both you and I would agree that Latino's are disproportionately affected. Concluded that Obama's statement has likely come to fruition. i.e. Not unreasonable given subsequent rhetoric and policy (including policy deemed unlawful).​

It's ok if you don't agree with my assessment. But it is certainly not pointless to properly expand on why. I don't agree Obama is above criticism at all, nor did my post say anything about Obama's performance as president. If it appears that way I'd say it's likely more due to discontent over aging presidents and the blatant corruption / criminality associated with Trump (percieved to be unfathomable in previous eras of US politics). I did compliment the nature of political debates at the time. The only compliment on Obama was provided by Republican candidate Romney (to show that he doesn't harbour animosity against Obama long after his presidency).

The below summarises the arguments and walks you through the steps I took to evaluate each claim. Any information I introduced was done so only as it was relevant in assessing the claim at hand. If you want to address particular lines, I am more than willing to hear you out. Also, if there are instances where you strongly believe I demonstrated bias, then that would be good to address as well.

The claim: 'Obama also demonstrated Trump's use of violent political rhetoric to divide and demonise minority groups and/or political opponents'.

Evaluation of implied arguments (A):
A1.1 People opposed to same sex marriage were unfairly labelled bigots by Obama

​

Defined bigot. Identified two viable reasons for opposing same-sex marriage views. Reasons identified were i) intolerance (personal belief), and ii) religious views. Reason i) meets bigot criteria according to its definition. Reason ii) convoluted due to the grey area between religious moral beliefs and intolerance. Considered that even if religious people may have valid religious reasons to oppose same-sex views, the underlying religious teachings are reasonably described as intolerant or bigoted. Did not identify further reasons extending beyond religious or personal intolerance.​

A1.2. And this was an attack on Republicans.

Quote not found to explicitly reference Republicans. Stances on the topic predominately based on religious views as opposed to political affiliation. No group was mentioned in the quote except people 'bigoted' (intolerant to) same-sex relations. Concluded that due to the above factors it is not a legitimate example of violent political rhetoric.​

​

A2. The 'war on women' political slogan wrongfully suggests Republicans plan to take away women's rights.

Sourced a definition on the 'war on women' political slogan. Slogan was not found to originate from Obama (has ties to 90s, popularised by critics of George Bush). Looked for instances of Republicans improving women's rights since Obama. Looked for examples against. Used Trump's quote promising to purposely rig the supreme court to overturn Roe v Wade (1973). Noted Trump's plan worked in repealing women rights to abortion (2022) - senate pushed it to the states. 14 Republican states and 0 Democrat states remove the right to abortion. Touched on the stricter ideas supported by elements of the Republican party (Hegeseth, for example). Concluded that the Republicans did not improve women's rights, nor did they keep them the same. They did, however, take away key women's rights that had been granted for 49 years. Also haven't touched on the Trump admin's derogatory undertones with their rhetoric on 'DEI'​

​

A3. - did not find any information on what the quote was -

A4. Obama told Latino's that Republicans were their enemy

On first view, agreed this resembled a Trump-style attack. Researched the context of the quote. Identified that Obama clarified the quote a month after making it. Obama claimed he was warning Latino's that future Republican administrations will enact immigration policies targeting ethnic minorities such themselves. Considered the merits to this claim based on subsequent events. Throughout 2016-2024, political rhetoric increasingly radical; increased use of terms such as 'illegal aliens'. ICE since been permitted to racially profile. Unlawful detention and deportation widespread in 2025. Republican party removed the right for due process and 70% of victims were found to be legal during a 10 day study in LA (and Latinos disproportionately fear deportation). Republicans ignored court orders deeming ICE actions unlawful. Data of deportation by race/ethnicity is not readily available at this stage, although both you and I would agree that Latino's are disproportionately affected. Concluded that Obama's statement has likely come to fruition. i.e. Not unreasonable given subsequent rhetoric and policy (including policy deemed unlawful).​

Hey H27272727, just curious, have you have you ever written book. Some of your posts are epic.