Back in 2016 I bet everyone on DDO that Trump was gonna win and I was roasted and lambasted for suggesting such a thing. Hillary was gonna win, it was a slam dunk. I knew better. Just to throw this out there and make all of you loose your minds again, I will make this prediction. The police officer who "ALLEGEDLY" murdered George Floyd, and I use the word "allegedly" because "SUPPOSEDLY" you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, wont be convicted. George Floyd was alive and kicking in the back of the police car after the neck video. The autopsy will show he died of a heart attack or some kind of organ failure due to the drugs that were in his system at the time, not asphyxiation. Just saying. When it comes time to testify "under oath" the corner is gonna tell it like it really is. Forget what you have heard on the news. Anyone wanna bet I am wrong?
Wanna bet?
Posts
Total:
18
-->
@sadolite
Nope, I don't wanna bet. Betting will eventually make me lose money based on my luck.
If you say that this isn't about that, then I will question your decision putting that as the title.
-->
@User_2006
It's a rhetorical bet, although I did make an actual non monetary bet on DDO with one person. They could not log on for thirty days if they lost the bet. He welshed on it of course.
-->
@sadolite
I think trump will lose, but nope, not bettin'.
-->
@User_2006
I will predict a landslide win for Trump. The reason I say this is the Democrats did not give me one reason to vote "FOR" them in 2016 and even less reason in 2020. The die hard Never Trumper's will not be enough. They offer nothing worth voting "FOR" other than vote against Trump because we think he's a poopy head. My opinion of course, you may see something in the Democrat party that eludes me that's worth voting "FOR".
-->
@sadolite
Back in 2016 I bet everyone on DDO that Trump was gonna win and I was roasted and lambasted for suggesting such a thing. Hillary was gonna win, it was a slam dunk. I knew better.
The Liberal tears were so sweet. Trump always gets the last laugh. He’s undefeated.
-->
@sadolite
Back in 2016 I bet everyone on DDO that Trump was gonna win and I was roasted and lambasted for suggesting such a thing.
I remember that thread. It was hilarious. Especially right after the election when the unstoppable force of reality met the immovable object of liberal delusion.
-->
@sadolite
I would absolutely bet you money for that. I expect no less ignorance from a diehard Republican, I am even less shocked when in particular you admire and support Trump.
You are free to report this post. I am free to post it. George Floyd was murdered, period. There is no debate or room for option 2, it is literally on video.
-->
@sadolite
In fact, you are spreading severe misinformation with that post. I think there should be a rule about that.
-->
@RationalMadman
George Floyd was murdered, period.
I'll offer mild disagreement, as murder implies intent to kill (manslaughter and a probably a few other charges). Still, the eggshell skull rule makes the death a death, even if he had health issues which contributed. The officer killed him, there is no sane doubt about that.
spreading severe misinformation with that post. I think there should be a rule about that.
There was some discussion of having a rule against harmful disinformation. Around that time some troll was spreading disinformation about Covid. However, it's a hard thing to word, when people need to be free to have discussions of controversial topics. ... You're of course welcome to suggest such a rule for a future referendum (Press is currently organizing one).
-->
@sadolite
The autopsy will show he died of a heart attack or some kind of organ failure due to the drugs that were in his system at the time, not asphyxiation. Just saying. When it comes time to testify "under oath" the corner is gonna tell it like it really is. Forget what you have heard on the news.
The final autopsy findings came out on June 1. Homicide, caused by "cardiopulmonary arrest" from "law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression." The drugs are listed under "other significant conditions."
Can't imagine why the medical examiner would discredit his own report in court, but that said, it won't surprise me if Chauvin gets off.
-->
@User_2006
not everything is literal
-->
@Dr.Franklin
No, Sadolite started this thread, but he offered no one to bet. Instead, he just talks about how he bet and won. Plus, I answered his question. I don't wanna bet.
-->
@User_2006
it wasnt based on money...
-->
@Barney
There was some discussion of having a rule against harmful disinformation. Around that time some troll was spreading disinformation about Covid. However, it's a hard thing to word, when people need to be free to have discussions of controversial topics. ... You're of course welcome to suggest such a rule for a future referendum (Press is currently organizing one).
I don't agree with this. It shouldn't be the responsibility of the moderators of this site to fact-check everything and stop people from spreading misinformation. Rather it should be the responsibility of readers to think for themselves, do their own research, question suspicious things, and try to be their own fact-checkers as much as possible.
In a site like debateart, where people are free to debate anything no matter how stupid the subject matter might be, you are bound to have a wide variety of people with a wide variety of different views and opinions on certain things and different biases towards certain things, who will come here to debate those thing out. You are bound to have some people accusing others of "misinformation" while others spread actual misinformation, and others denying that it's misinformation, as a result. That's the nature of debating sites like this.
Plus, where do we draw the line on this, and who holds the burden of proof here? If I share a personal story about how I went grocery shopping this one time, will I now have to provide a receipt or something to prove that this is true so it doesn't get labeled as "misinformation" and I get penalized for spreading misinformation as a result?
My point is that "a rule against harmful disinformation" is going to be too difficult to enforce on a site like this, especially when people are naturally going to argue a lot over what is and what isn't misinformation, as well as what is and isn't true.
-->
@RationalMadman
I wont report it, I am not a triggered little pussy. I can take it. I support Trump not the Republican party . Trump only ran as a Republican he is in no way in alignment with the Republican party. The Republican party is every bit the traitorous treasonous party as the Democrat party. I d have them all hanged. Both parties sold this country and the people down the river to enrich themselves and to the detriment of multiple generations to come.
-->
@RationalMadman
How would you know if anything is misinformation? I get my information from the same place you get yours. LOL Two people can listen to the same words verbatim and come up with two completely different interpretations. Why is your interpretation of any information more valid? For example: "Wearing masks helps stop the spread of covid -19". Millions interpret this as accurate information and millions who actually know in the real science of masks, how they work and the different designs will say it's complete BS. Who's wrong? Who's spreading the disinformation? And here's the best part, when one interpretation provides indisputable scientific evidence that the other interpretation is wrong. The interpretation that is wrong, after having been proved wrong using indisputable scientific evidence will still believe they are right. The Govt, the healthcare industry and the entire scientific community are not exempt from doing this. There are numerous examples of all three doing this. Willfully I might add.
-->
@Christen
I have no plans to try to push one. And if anyone else proposes such a rule, I would hope it is worded carefully to avoid the problems you gave.