Because we're talking about Trump having a specific plan to change things in a specific way, whereas you're talking about something at most tangentially related to Trump. You could have given exactly the same remarks five years ago and just dropped the last two sentences or said 'I hope a generic Republican president wins, because that'll pull the wool off of people's eyes.'mr friendly guy wrote: ↑2018-06-21 05:24amHey Simon, I notice you haven't actually answered why is it ok to discuss Trump's foreign policy by comparing to previous presidents, but when I do it, its magically derailment. You are clearly comparing Trump's policy to past presidents, you even state it. Your lack of self awareness would be comedic if it wasn't so pathetic.
When challenged on this, your first reaction was to say "Its a criticism of mainstream media, or so called establishment media who did not raise a stink with Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush junior, Obama when they did it, but only does it when Trump does it." So do I take you at your word, and conclude that your thesis is about the media, not about Trump?
I mean, a generic "America's human rights record has always been nothing more than a propaganda tool to fool people into thinking it's a decent country, and the media boosts this propaganda signal" thread would be fine and all, but trying to turn all other threads that reference the US and human rights into that thread isn't.
That's the difference right there. You're not only saying "Trump is just more openly following the same foreign policy as past presidents," because you'd get laughed out of the thread if you did. You're also taking the opportunity to pull out the soapbox and talk about other favorite issues like "the media sucks and is biased against Trump" and "America in general sucks and Americans shouldn't talk like their country has ever valued human rights."