Social War Room Lounge Thread #325: PotWR Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
Idk how the right wing shitposter gets off making fun of anyone else's horoscope. He was so bothered by the label he decided to selectively feed his own posts to the AI in the hopes the sorting hat would give him something better.

It's beyond hilarious to me that he thinks calling me a left winger is a win when the same assessment puts our intellectual abilities so far apart. If I'm that much smarter than him then holding the "dumber" positions isn't something to be proud of, lol.

What do you call someone who was convicted of a crime if not a criminal? Do you think its normal to elect people who commit white collar crimes? Especially one centered on campaign finance?

I never get this argument from others. White collar crime is still crime. Sure, the perpetrators don't look like meth heads or drug dealers which is really what it's about. Crime is okay when perpetrated by those with more money, status, or influence. When those people commit crimes, people see themselves as similarly situated actors. It's when poor people commit crimes that these people are angry because they're not similarly situated socially.

Similarly, poor people might be more understanding about selling drugs to pay rent or stealing food to feed one's family.
 
For me the whole point of the forum is to hash out arguments, I forget that for a lot of you politics is more about vibes than values.
I appreciate that but over two days when everything was fresh we didn't agree. I don't think we're going to agree here either and its a long past subject anyway. The only new stuff is about Biden imo. But there are threads on that stuff. I haven't really weighed in much.
I accept that it happened but that doesn't mean I shouldn't push back when you lie and say the majority voted for him.
Well... second most in history.... whatever that means and literally about half. You're picking out one small point to create issue. But it's pointless and doesn't address how he got as many as he did.
 
pp,504x498-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.jpg

Whatever helps you thru this one, comrade.

There's that moderate intelligence again.
 
<surebuddy> Better to be a shit poster than a terrorist.
According to the AI I'm more of a Principled Pragmatist, a shitposter just wouldn't understand.

But now I'm curious, can you post this assessment based on these selective posts which deems me an extremist? And can you tell me what posts you fed the AI?
 
I appreciate that but over two days when everything was fresh we didn't agree. I don't think we're going to agree here either and its a long past subject anyway.
I don't expect you to agree, you're too far gone.
Well... second most in history.... whatever that means and literally about half. You're picking out one small point to create issue. But it's pointless and doesn't address how he got as many as he did.
Again not quite half so let's try and be honest here. You guys act like he got an overwhelming mandate when he didn't even win half the popular vote and won fewer votes than Biden did and then get annoyed when I point out your lies.
 
you and others call him a criminal. He was convicted of a white collar crime.
This is the problem with his not going to trial. How could he be convicted when he gained immunity from prosecution? It's amazing how many people are willing to avoid the reality of the evidence against him to make excuses.
 
My biggest gripe would be the 2nd Amendment but to be honest I'm not well versed on all her policies. Maybe her image problem is somewhat manufactured but she's seen more as a "squad" progressive that would scare away the moderate vote. I don't know anyone that was confident she would win.
Not hearing many specifics here, so let's chalk it up to the uninformed thinking she is far left.
 
It's beyond hilarious to me that he thinks calling me a left winger is a win when the same assessment puts our intellectual abilities so far apart. If I'm that much smarter than him then holding the "dumber" positions isn't something to be proud of, lol.
You'd think with how unflattering the assessment was of him he wouldn't put so much stock into it but then again I guess you wouldn't expect reasonable posting from a shitposter.
I never get this argument from others. White collar crime is still crime. Sure, the perpetrators don't look like meth heads or drug dealers which is really what it's about. Crime is okay when perpetrated by those with more money, status, or influence. When those people commit crimes, people see themselves as similarly situated actors. It's when poor people commit crimes that these people are angry because they're not similarly situated socially.

Similarly, poor people might be more understanding about selling drugs to pay rent or stealing food to feed one's family.
Its a way for people like Rob to hand wave away Trump's crimes so as to downplay how uniquely unsuited for office he is because it allows him to maintain this stance of being an independent caught between two equally bad sides. If he had to confront just how uniquely unfit for office Trump is he might have to concede that actually both sides aren't equally bad.
 
I don't expect you to agree, you're too far gone.
Cheers.
Again not quite half so let's try and be honest here. You guys act like he got an overwhelming mandate when he didn't even win half the popular vote and won fewer votes than Biden did and then get annoyed when I point out your lies.
Im not debating mandate etc. This was similar when Hillary lost. There is no way to accept it other than to demonize the other side. The numbers were impressive. 2nd most.... most minority vote since RR. Either way he won and there were good peeps that voted for him including peeps that didnt vote for him previously.
 
Im not debating mandate etc. This was similar when Hillary lost. There is no way to accept it other than to demonize the other side. The numbers were impressive. 2nd most.... most minority vote since RR. Either way he won and there were good peeps that voted for him including peeps that didnt vote for him previously.
How about when Trump lost and tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power? That you're okay with. Btw do you think Trump lost the 2020 election?
 
If its just my last 100 posts or so then I could see how it would say that.

This would make me look like a hardcore Catholic, lol.

@Mr Holmes

Haha it called you a right wing shitposter :D

🧠 Profile of the Poster


1. Sentiment & Tone Analysis

CategoryAssessment
PolitenessLow. Often sarcastic, mocking, and combative. Responds to disagreement with hostility, ridicule, and name-calling.
KindnessMinimal. Displays contempt for political opponents. Occasional acknowledgment of another user’s point, but generally dismissive and adversarial.
AngerHigh. Frequently angry and frustrated, especially toward the political left, illegal immigration, and perceived media manipulation. Tone is caustic and often inflammatory.
ToneAggressive, sarcastic, cynical. Littered with ridicule and insults, often hidden behind internet humor and memes.
EmpathyExtremely selective. Shows some concern for American workers and perceived victims of left-wing policies. Shows disdain for marginalized groups like immigrants, trans people, and protesters.


2. Intelligence Estimation

  • Language Use: Casual and frequently vulgar. Intersperses mock memes, internet slang, and references to forum users. Occasionally coherent in presenting logical (if ideologically tilted) arguments.
  • Argumentation: Argumentation is often buried in sarcasm, with assertions left unsupported or based on cherry-picked examples. Shows a mix of surface-level political awareness and conspiracy-tinged speculation.
  • Analytical Depth: Inconsistent. Occasionally engages with facts (e.g., FBI reports on China, labor market impacts), but generally sticks to ideological talking points. Unwilling to seriously challenge their own beliefs.


🧭 Ideological Orientation

Left–Right Spectrum

EvidenceLeaning
Extremely critical of Democrats, progressives, immigration policyRight
Frequent use of culture war buzzwords: “woke,” “shitlibs,” “muh fascism,” etc.Right-wing populist
Hostile to DEI, gender identity discourse, trans issues, and perceived race-based policiesCulturally far-right
Occasionally cites working-class struggles, but only as a rhetorical tool against immigrationEconomically nationalist/right


Authoritarian–Libertarian Spectrum

EvidenceLeaning
Frequently calls for harsh policy enforcement (e.g., immigration, criminal justice)Authoritarian-leaning
Mocking of civil rights movements, protesters, and left-leaning legal protectionsStrongly authoritarian cultural tone
Distrust of global NGOs, media, and “the regime”Libertarian tendencies regarding elite distrust, but still favors coercive state power on issues


🎭 Archetype Match



⚖️ Summary Table

TraitAssessment
PolitenessLow — abrasive and mocking
KindnessLow — highly partisan and hostile
Anger LevelHigh — outrage-driven commentary
Intellectual DepthModerate — selective engagement
Political LeaningHard right, nationalist-populist
Authority PreferenceAuthoritarian-leaning
My buddy @Fox by the Sea

🧠 Profile of the Poster

1. Sentiment & Tone Analysis​

CategoryAssessment
PolitenessVery Low. Often hostile, mocking, and derisive. Relies on ridicule, racial slurs, and name-calling. Little effort made to engage respectfully.
KindnessExtremely Low. Rarely shows compassion or understanding. Dehumanizes political or ethnic groups. Dismissive of social empathy.
AngerVery High. Rants, insults, and conspiracy-driven hostility permeate most replies. Rage appears focused on immigration, "leftists," and minorities.
ToneAggressive, inflammatory, and conspiratorial. Laced with racist, xenophobic, and nationalistic rhetoric. Frequently sarcastic and contemptuous.
EmpathyLargely absent. Occasionally feigns concern for societal well-being but usually wrapped in exclusionary or punitive framing.
Verdict: Reactionary and antagonistic in tone. The user frequently engages in flamebait, trolling, and ethnonationalist rhetoric. Most emotional investment appears to be driven by resentment, not constructive principles.

2. Intelligence Estimation​

  • Language Use:
    Verbally agile, albeit crude. Heavy use of slang, sarcasm, and ridicule. Mixes memes with rhetorical jabs. Occasionally demonstrates awareness of historical or artistic concepts (e.g., Renaissance, religious analogies).
  • Argumentation:
    Inconsistent. Often relies on false equivalence, logical fallacies, and unfounded accusations. When not mocking or derailing, arguments are oversimplified or built on anecdotal/conspiratorial premises.
  • Analytical Depth:
    Superficial and selective. Occasionally touches on political or historical nuances (e.g., critique of UK military policy as distraction), but this is rare and usually couched in a hostile worldview. Prioritizes ideological narrative over factual consistency.
Estimated Intelligence: Moderate
Capable of crafting coherent sentences and spotting rhetorical angles, but prone to illogical conclusions, dogma, and conspiracism. Intelligence is hindered by intense bias and refusal to engage critically with opposing views.

🧭 Ideological Orientation

Left–Right Spectrum​

EvidenceLeaning
Hostile to migrants, trans people, and “parasites”Far Right
Frequently mocks leftist causes and social justice movementsFar Right
Advocates "Rooftop Korean" vigilantism and racial hierarchiesFar Right
Opposes multiculturalism and expresses ethnonationalist sentimentFar Right
Supports Trump and nationalist populismPopulist Right
Assessment: Far Right / Reactionary — Deeply opposed to progressive ideals. Exhibits racial essentialism, anti-immigration obsession, and overt hostility toward diversity. Often frames political conflict as existential or civilizational.

Authoritarian–Libertarian Spectrum​

EvidenceLeaning
Favors militarized responses to protest and crimeAuthoritarian
Supports moral censorship ("ban it all", “deal with it”)Authoritarian
Displays authoritarian envy (e.g. control of morality, punishment fantasies)Authoritarian
Occasionally invokes democratic will — but selectively, and in service of exclusionary valuesAuthoritarian opportunism
Assessment: Authoritarian Right — Embraces punitive justice, societal control, and suppression of dissent. Believes in majoritarian enforcement of narrow moral values. Dislikes liberal democracy when it enables multicultural or progressive outcomes.

🎭 Archetype Match
“The Ethnonationalist Provocateur”

Engages in online discourse primarily to troll, provoke, and inflame. Obsessed with identity, race, and perceived societal decline. Distrusts institutions, immigrants, and minorities. Believes in strict hierarchies and punitive responses to dissent. Uses irony to mask genuine bigotry.

⚖️ Summary Table
TraitAssessment
PolitenessVery Low (frequently abusive and inflammatory)
Rudeness/KindnessHighly rude and dismissive; kindness largely absent
Anger LevelVery High — especially toward leftists, migrants, minorities
Intellectual DepthModerate — occasionally insightful, but heavily biased
Political LeaningFar Right
Authority PreferenceAuthoritarian — favors control and suppression
It called me a right wing shit poster <lol>

Literally Hitler(s).

{<jordan}
 
How about when Trump lost and tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power? That you're okay with. Btw do you think Trump lost the 2020 election?
Dude we already talked about this too. I never again want to have millions of mail-in ballots where someone has to punch in who was voted for. But it was a covid election and likely will not be repeated. I'm good with the results I never debated it. I've always said if the Republicans could have found evidence enough then it would have come out. We also had a big conversation on January 6th. I don't believe that's what happened.
 
I have stressed this for years. No one gives a shit about Jan 6.

Literally the election in November proved that.
That's a pretty fallacious kind of framing though. If it were true, someone could have said Biden beating Trump meant "immigration didn't matter". At face value, it's dumb, and rhetorically, it's just an empty argumentative posture. Re: Jan 6, the better approach is to actually ask _why_. And we can disagree vehemently on what it meant, but that's very different than claiming it didn't matter. I'm of the opinion that it represents a major escalation in my previously mentioned concentration of reactionary social and political power. In a healthier democracy, the erosion would be less significant.
 
Last edited:
oh man you guys talk politics here too?
kinda defeats the purpose.
 
Dude we already talked about this too. I never again want to have millions of mail-in ballots where someone has to punch in who was voted for. But it was a covid election and likely will not be repeated. I'm good with the results I never debated it. I've always said if the Republicans could have found evidence enough then it would have come out.
Don't you think it says something uniquely bad about Trump that he lied about election fraud to stay in power?
We also had a big conversation on January 6th. I don't believe that's what happened.
You don't believe what happened? Trump trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power? The thing he did in broad daylight and in front of camera?
 
This is the problem with his not going to trial. How could he be convicted when he gained immunity from prosecution? It's amazing how many people are willing to avoid the reality of the evidence against him to make excuses.

Very many people. Enough to re-elect him!
 
Anti-establishment is and always has been a liberal position (not Democrat/Republican -- the political parties have changed ideologies many times over the years). The primary differentiator between the 2 political spectrums has always been about the role of government in private lives.

@Islam Imamate is wrong about the right being anti-establishment. They're not. The modern right is very pro-establishment. They are very aggressive about taking government institutions and using them to implement a specific social order. Just because they have rejected how the Democrats used those institutions doesn't mean that they have rejected the use of the institutions themselves.

There are very few true anti-establishment people out there in the modern era. It's just different opinions on how to leverage government, not any true desire to leverage less of it.
This post...
I like it
 
Don't you think it says something uniquely bad about Trump that he lied about election fraud to stay in power?
I do think he believed it.
You don't believe what happened? Trump trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power? The thing he did in broad daylight and in front of camera?
Correct. Im also not starting this whole thing over again. Let me see if I can tag you in the thread haha.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top