I mean, it literally didn't provide context; it did not explicitly refer to that which it was addressing. (Implicit is another matter) For all I know, he was addressing my mention of bigot. Anyway, that seems an egregiously broad definition. Google may define it that way, but Mirriam-Webster adds: especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance which is my understanding of bigot.
So you weren't paying attention, and you haven't been, to his posting or its context. That's no sin - probably speaks in your favor. But I was - hence my response, which was not what "linked it to Trump" - it was already linked, solidly, in this thread.
Not at all. Your posting here has been almost completely in thrall to the wingnut PC lingo, more so than average.
How about bite me? I posted in post 20 using that word. You are entitled to your opinion of the context of his definition. That does not extend to casting aspersions upon my attention span. You don't own the subtext of this thread.
I didn't. I posted this: I meant that. Not having followed these twisty little Trumpvote apologists through their various tangled self-justifications and Foxqueries is perfectly reasonable, and pointing to it is not an aspersion at all. Just don't put that mare's nest on me, ok? And neither do you, such as when you attempt to assign the "link to Trump" to me. Sculptor's post was solidly linked to the Trump discussion on this thread, and not by me - by him.
A pretty back-handed compliment I guess. I stated an extant fact. You were the third person (after me and Sculptor) to use the word 'bigot', and you used it in the same sentence as 'Trump'. That's not subtext; that's explicit context. (I'm not suggesting you created the connection, simply that you made it explicit). What I found strange was two unrelated references to bigotry in the same thread (mine re: KSM, and et al re: Trump). Sculptor's post was ambiguous about which one it referenced. Anyway, it's no biggie for me. The thread has progressed since my post(s), and I don't need to drag it backwards.
Now ther is 5 votes for Trump an 6 votes for Hillary... so over half the people who didnt vote for Hillary in the presidential election now druther that Hillary had won.!!!
My intelegence is OFF TOPIC Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
OK, OK. Don't blow a gasket. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
"or what" woud be the closest to the corect answr.!!! Poll Queston::: Knowin what you know now... woud you rather that Hillary had won.??? Edit::: Did you get my frind request.???
Yeah... but i thank Trump coud literally spit in the face of lots of his suporters an they woud still love him Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I sware... im beginin to thank that some people woud even vote for a not to bright, racest misogynistic narcissistic pathological-liar for president Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
How is it you can spell these more difficult words but can't spell simple one-syllable words? I think you are a fraud. And that would make you another of the resident trolls on this forum.
I've never doubted that cluelusshusbund's writing "style" is an affectation. Lots of members take on a persona. That doesn't, in and of itself, make him a troll. He's harmless.