Difference between revisions of "Talk:Stacey Abrams"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Edit conflict: reply)
(Edit conflict)
 
Line 100: Line 100:
 
:No response, huh?  Do you really want these trolls running your website? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]]</sup> 03:29, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
 
:No response, huh?  Do you really want these trolls running your website? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]]</sup> 03:29, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
 
::Raffensperger's criticism of Stacey Abrams would be a noteworthy admission, and I don't see why his name needs to be mentioned in the text when referencing it in a footnote.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:59, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
 
::Raffensperger's criticism of Stacey Abrams would be a noteworthy admission, and I don't see why his name needs to be mentioned in the text when referencing it in a footnote.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:59, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
 +
:::The citation needs to be qualified. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]]</sup> 15:05, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==
 
{{reflist}}
 
{{reflist}}

Latest revision as of 19:05, May 12, 2021

Please discuss alternative language here. Thank you. RobSFree Kyle! 23:58, 10 May 2021 (EDT)

I honestly don't give a darn about discussions, especially when they waste time and many times are unproductive. But fine, I'll humor you. The edit about Stacey Abrams was up and out sourced, and last I checked, if a wiki edit has sourced information, it is to STAY, UNLESS the source is up and out false and/or doesn't match up. Pokeria1 (talk) 05:25, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
It was sourced to Brad Raffensperger. RobSFree Kyle! 05:33, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
So? It still is sourced showing how Abrams was ultimately a sore loser who would rather peddle conspiracy theories than accept her loss. And let me remind you that despite being a far-left website otherwise, HuffPost actually DID give an article that gave surprisingly severe condemnation of Che Guevara and Fidel Castro. Pokeria1 (talk) 05:36, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Does Brad Raffensaperger represent a conservative perspective? is he a credible source? RobSFree Kyle! 05:50, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Brad Raffensperger cannot be used without naming him by name to make him look credible. Failing to do so appears to be the work of woke leftists. RobSFree Kyle! 05:56, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
HuffPost is a very left-wing source, yet when even THEY admit that Che Guevara was a scumbag who shouldn't be worshipped, broke ranks with their fellow leftists at that, it's still grounds for citation despite that. I'm pretty sure even Raffensberger still qualifies as a valid source in this particular case as well. Either way, I fail to see how Stacey Abrams comes out clean with that source, and if anything removing it is more likely to aid her than it is to aid Conservativism. To put it another way, I fail to see how Woke Leftists would have anything to gain citing Raffensberger at all, especially when if anything that would cause them to stop supporting Abrams. Pokeria1 (talk) 05:59, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
It was never mentioned that Brad Raffensperger was the source trashing Abrams. Using his name might have even generated some sympathy for Abrams rather than making her look like a paranoid conspiracy kook. RobSFree Kyle! 06:10, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
And would the fact that Raffensberger was technically on her side be more of a reason to use it as a source since he's literally condemning her? Besides, woke leftists don't even listen to him anyways, even when he's capitulating to their ends. Even though George W. Bush was closer in political outlook to George Lucas regarding globalism, the latter STILL trashes the former as a provincial boob who doesn't care about the world. It would be the same deal here. Pokeria1 (talk) 06:18, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Oh so now George W. Bush, who was the reincarnation of Hitler, is now a great American hero like John McCain to the left? Let's wait 4 more years when President DeSantis takes office and then hear leftists sing the praises of Donald Trump. RobSFree Kyle! 06:33, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
First of all, I didn't say George Lucas was singing praises for Bush, I said the exact opposite, especially when there were a few conservatives even back then who also weren't fond of the Bushes (even called them the Bush Crime Family). Heck, we had a few on Conservapedia even BEFORE Trump got elected. Second of all, it's unlikely they're going to be singing praises for Donald Trump anytime soon. Pokeria1 (talk) 06:52, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Yah well I'm having a hard time connecting the dots how a bunch of racists are trying to make Stacy Abrams look bad by citing Brad Raffenbsperger without using his name. RobSFree Kyle! 07:05, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
It has absolutely nothing to do with her race. If Stacey Abrams had the appearance of, say, Melissa McCarthy or Rosie O'Donnell (ie, caucasian) and she did those things, we'd cite him anyways. Pokeria1 (talk) 07:12, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
That's the problem - Raffensperger was not named as the source. And again, an insult to our conservative readers' intelligence. Do you believe Brad Raffensperger is an authority on who is and who is not a conspiracy theorist? do you think our conservative readers are that stupid they will believe any line of garbage from an unnamed source? RobSFree Kyle! 07:23, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Quite frankly, I don't care at this point. If anything, we haven't gone far enough to STOP the left dead in its tracks regarding exposing their crap. If we were going much farther in exposing the left and breaking them like Northwest was doing, Trump probably would still be in office right now instead of Biden, and the mask policy would be gone much sooner rather than our being stuck with it thanks to our idiot corporate heads stupidly insisting that we wait for the CDC to give the green light to removing the masks, in spite of their not only already removing the six feet social distancing, but also the fact that the CDC was just recently exposed as having kept the schools closed simply because the American Federation of Teachers told them not to reopen them at any point, and such reasonings had absolutely NOTHING to do with COVID-19, meaning they're no longer even trustworthy and certainly not likely to remove the mask guidelines regardless of the science. Pokeria1 (talk) 07:35, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Breaking the left? Who put all this trolling garbage in this and the Communism article (and other articles)? With the 90/10 rule, woke leftists have to pretend to be bona fide. Me personally, I do not focus on reverting blanked pages. I ferret out subversive content placed in articles. RobSFree Kyle! 07:42, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
If you're implying that I'm a woke leftist, forget it. If anything, I outright HATE the left, especially the woke left, especially after how they tried to brainwash me in college and in various media I consume, which is ALSO why I am downright furious with people trying to make Conservapedia more like Wikipedia right now, including you and Conservative. My bona fide is genuine in other words. And I also try to revert any attempts at vandalization as well, as did NorthWest (more than blanked out pages, if I must add). Pokeria1 (talk) 07:59, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
I can't be fooled. I've been at this game too long. I got arrested when I was 12 years old as a Young Republican for peeling off a George Wallace bumper sticker. Although I was too stupid to realize how a third party split among Democrats would help Republicans, I still had my priorities right, choosing peace with honor over a bunch of racist law and order types and Democrats willing to chew up American youth in endless, unwinnable wars. I'm rarely fooled by any line of garbage, and the longer I study it and recognize patterns and outcomes, the clearer it becomes. RobSFree Kyle! 08:13, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
I'd support Vietnam if it at least ensured Communism was exterminated after they tried to exterminate us Christians, per what God demanded, that God rule the world via Christianity. This world only exists so God can rule over it alone, while we are all his slaves, mere pawns in his game, even with our free will. And the only ones who claim law and order are racists ARE the woke types, or maybe you haven't noticed how BLM is decrying law and order is racist. Pokeria1 (talk) 08:25, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Well them Dems in those days protested their own war that they started. And how did they respond? they accused Nixon, who ended their stupid war, of being Hitler. RobSFree Kyle! 08:29, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Yeah, I'm aware of that. George Lucas even used that crap as the basis of Star Wars and modeled the Rebels after the VC (which is why I'm NOT supporting the Rebels anymore and if anything am supporting the Empire. Already learned my lesson from Peace Walker). Which is all the MORE reason why I'm accusing you of being a democrat plant, especially with your defense of Joe Biden and your inferring law and order is racist (the only ones who consider law and order racist are woke leftist types). And I support Nixon with ending the war with our and South Vietnam's VICTORY, as Prager University revealed. However, Democrats basically wrecked that by reneigning on the treaty Nixon drafted and let the North Vietnamese invade. Pokeria1 (talk) 08:34, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
America's drug problem today is the legacy of the Vietnam War. The CCP flooded Saigon with cheap dope, got American servicemen hooked, and we lost the war. The drug problem did not exist beforehand. But does now, courtesy of the Democrats and the CCP. RobSFree Kyle! 08:38, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Actually, We WON Vietnam, it was Congressional Democrats exploiting Wategate that wrecked our victory. Pokeria1 (talk) 08:41, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
I'm a communist democrat plant and Biden supporter? What kind of drugs are you on? RobSFree Kyle! 08:44, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
I'm not a Democrat, I love my country. RobSFree Kyle! 08:49, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Was at work so didn't have a chance to respond earlier. As far as your rebuttal, if you truly weren't that, why did you try to undo Northwest's edits, including especially the ones pointing out Biden stole the election? And it's gotten to the point that even Karajou suspects you as a plant. And most likely Andy as well, based on his removing your SYSOP privileges twice recently. If you were truly loving your country of America, you'd be aiding Northwest in his edits, not undoing them and then trying to ban him. I know that's what I would be doing in your shoes. Pokeria1 (talk) 18:20, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Why are you tag teaming? RobSFree Kyle! 18:38, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
What does any of that have to do with Brad Raffensperger being a credible source of criticism of Stacy Abrams? And why is your tag team only interested in sowing division in CP administration? RobSFree Kyle! 19:06, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
My, Karajou, and Northwest's primary concern for Conservapedia is that it continues to strictly support Conservativism, the only true ideology short of Christianity. And if anyone, including you, tries to push leftist views by interfering in any way with pushing Conservative views, you know, Conservapedia's bread and butter, its namesake even, we will stop them. And my personal motive deals with how I was nearly brainwashed during school and college, narrowly escaped it, and having to witness so many stuff pushing the leftist agenda. I am NOT going to let Conservapedia become another Wikipedia. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:16, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
I've been on Rationalwiki's Most Wanted Hit List since the Kevin Conley letter. [1] So we've had an internal disagreement on how to deal with trolls. You are not answering the question why we are here right now - Is Brad Raffensperger a credible source of criticism in this article. RobSFree Kyle! 19:27, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
If you were serious about building good faith with Conservapedia, the rules state that you could remove the personal attack on another user on Northwest's mainspace. But neither of you have done it. RobSFree Kyle! 19:43, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Instead, I apparently am the target of both your activity. RobSFree Kyle! 19:47, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
I never even touched Northwest's main space in the first place, and for the record, that wasn't a personal attack. That was calling you out on your behavior. If he were to engage in a personal attack on you, he would have made an edit saying you liked forceful sodomy, or telling you you should slit your own throat, sort of like what several vandals have done on talk pages and even on user pages (not to mention a few encounters with anon users on other wikis, including one who outright told me to slit my own throat and even posted pictures of decapitated Iraqi men). In fact, how about I actually show an actual example of a personal attack. And quite frankly, I'm beginning to think we should be a bit more specific on the rules right now. As far as the question, yes, ultimately, Raffensberger is a credible source of criticism in this article. Pokeria1 (talk) 21:07, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Now you're trolling. You can remove the civility clause violation from NW mainspace to salvage your tag team's credibility if you wish.
If you're not going to address why Brad Raffensperger should be used as a source of criticism in the article on Stacy Abrams, this conversation is over. RobSFree Kyle! 21:24, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
I'm not trolling. If anything, that link I provided shows what ACTUAL trolling is like. And I have zero intention of removing it since it's not a civility clause violation by any definition. A call-out =/= civility clause violation. As far as as why it should be used as a source of criticism on Stacy Abrams, simple, it condemns Stacy Abrams, she's a left-winger, and thus it advances Conservativism, so why NOT use it if it aids Conservativism? Pokeria1 (talk) 21:28, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Brad Raffensperger aids the conservative movement, is that what you just said? RobSFree Kyle! 21:54, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
That time, he did. Pokeria1 (talk) 22:07, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Why? Cause he's a bigot? RobSFree Kyle! 22:17, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Seriously? How is Raffensperger a bigot? Sure, maybe he's a RINO, but I definitely don't recall him being a bigot. And quite frankly, it's talk like that that makes you look more like a left-wing plant and thus makes you suspicious. I've interacted with a LOT of people on the web, and the only ones I've seen use the "bigot" card are up and out leftists. Pokeria1 (talk) 22:22, 11 May 2021 (EDT)

<-- Trump calls Ga. Secretary of State "Enemy of the People". RobSFree Kyle! 22:24, 11 May 2021 (EDT)

Yeah? Even a broken clock is right twice a day. And last I checked, Trump also considered Stacy Abrams an enemy of the people as well, certainly someone guilty of voter fraud, so that if anything reinforces why he should be cited, especially regarding Stacy Abrams. And I still don't see how he's a bigot there. A RINO, sure, a backstabber, sure. But a bigot? Sorry, don't see it. Pokeria1 (talk) 22:26, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Oh, Donald Trump is a stopped clock right only twice a day now? RobSFree Kyle! 22:29, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
I was referring to Raffensperger regarding the broken clock analogy, NOT Donald Trump. Trumps's been more right than wrong. And quite frankly, you have no right to speak in the defense of Trump after you've spent time trying to undo Northwest's edits where he tried to point out Biden's status as a usurper and inferred the DHS was a reason. You should have said "to heck with the DHS mandate, it's true that Biden usurped the presidency. Do your worst." That's what I would have done. Pokeria1 (talk) 22:31, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln? RobSFree Kyle! 22:36, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
So, the question we have to answer here is, Who are we to believe, Donald J. Trump or the tag team of Pokeria1 and Northwest, who despite repeated requests to cease trolling and redundant personal attacks, have not done so. RobSFree Kyle! 22:49, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
First of all, even Donald Trump pointed out Stacy Abrams' role in voter fraud, and even went as far as to point out her sister as a conflict of interest. Second of all, I and Northwest actually WERE trying to defend Trump and stop Biden, and yet YOU ended up undoing several of his edits, some of which were going against Biden. Third of all, we didn't troll, and we most certainly didn't issue personal attacks, redundant or otherwise. If you or he were to engage in personal attacks, ACTUAL personal attacks, we would have posted decapitated Iraqi men's heads on your page and told you to kill yourself. And we never did that at all. Stop playing the victim, own up to your mistakes, and actually try to make Conservapedia, you know, CONSERVATIVE in the most absolute manner. Either way, I already reported you to Karajou, and specifically cited this conversation and your ban of Northwest. Pokeria1 (talk) 23:01, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Why should Brad Raffensperger be used as a source of criticism of Stracy Abrams as a "conspiracy theorist"? RobSFree Kyle! 23:12, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Well, since she's a leftist, and he's obviously talking bad about her, that's more than enough reason why he should be used as a source. Besides, even Trump denounced her, probably one of the few things Trump and Raffensperger actually agreed on. I mean, what, should we decide not to note that Noam Chomsky condemned Michel Foucault as being at best very warped in morality due to him not being much better himself? Pokeria1 (talk) 23:18, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
There are thousands of people who denounced Stacy Abrams as a conspiracy theorist, even in the Biden camp. Why should Raffensprger be used, whom Georgia Democrats routinely call him racist? RobSFree Kyle! 23:21, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Is that why you want to use Raffensperger, cause Georgia Democrats routinely call him racist? RobSFree Kyle! 23:23, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
That would make Stacy Abrams street cred look good, if racists are criticizing her. RobSFree Kyle! 23:25, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Why not any one of 10,000 other sources I could find to say Stacy Abrams is a conspiracy theorist? RobSFree Kyle! 23:26, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
Seriously? Racism had absolutely NOTHING to do with it. And Georgia Democrats were never involved in that edit anyways. It was sourced material, and last I checked, when something's sourced, we're NOT allowed to remove it, unless it's blatantly false information. And BTW, if anything, Biden's camp absolutely LOVES Stacy Abrams. In fact, she and Biden played a huge role in forcing the MLB to relocate by intimidating their leadership. And BTW, stop puting that under "off-topic", because that was a direct reply to your question, and thus is on-topic. Or maybe you should put YOUR question under the off-topic header. Pokeria1 (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2021 (EDT)
And just as an FYI, there's at least one source that doesn't even quote Raffensperger at all that nevertheless proves she was pushing conspiracy theories (in fact, the only reference to Raffensperger at all was the name of a then-ongoing court case): https://www.dailywire.com/news/stacey-abrams-voting-rights-pac-helped-group-that-pushed-voter-fraud-conspiracy-theories Not to mention the article itself doesn't exactly go soft on Brian Kemp either. So checkmate. Pokeria1 (talk) 23:39, 11 May 2021 (EDT)

<--

And seriously, you don't want to edit war on a talk page. Just stay on topic. Take that as a warning. RobSFree Kyle! 23:42, 11 May 2021 (EDT)

Edit conflict

What is wrong with this edit?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aschlafly (talk)

such as supporting election misinformation.[1][2]

The citation to Brad Raffensperger without naming him by name in text. RobSFree Kyle! 00:40, 12 May 2021 (EDT)

Here would be some alternative language, "Brad Raffensperger, whom President Trump referred to as an "enemy of the people",[3] claims Abrams is a conspiracy theorist who spreads election misinformation."
Is that acceptable? RobSFree Kyle! 00:49, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
Want me to put it in? Will that satisfy everybody? After I've been trolled with nonsense for the past 10 hours? RobSFree Kyle! 00:58, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
No response, huh? Do you really want these trolls running your website? RobSFree Kyle! 03:29, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
Raffensperger's criticism of Stacey Abrams would be a noteworthy admission, and I don't see why his name needs to be mentioned in the text when referencing it in a footnote.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:59, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
The citation needs to be qualified. RobSFree Kyle! 15:05, 12 May 2021 (EDT)

References