[includenotfound]

You're clearly devaluating a group of people.

"unsurprisingly": these people are predictable (by you, in this case)

"his genius moves": hyperbole, you clearly think they are not

You're saying people predictably like Trump's obviously bad moves AND are simultaneously incapable of reading these obvious moves (to paraphrase you without the snark). Then you're associating that with "petty thug mentality", as if people were too stupid not to look up to a criminal.

You are the edgy one here, and in fact smug about it. At least post proof of stock positions, otherwise you're just confidently accusing people of being stupid while not putting your money where your mouth is.

[varjag]

Notice how you ignored my question. I’m not sure if it’s malice or comprehension issue. Either way it’s not adding to the strength of your argument.

[includenotfound]

You: "How do you gauge the tone of the reply I was answering to?"

Me: "here's why, you said this word and that word, carrying this and that connotation"

You: "Notice how you ignored my question"

lmao

Anyway - positions? Or is it just talk?

[indiv0]

GP wasn’t asking how you gauge their tone. They were asking how would you classify the tone of the comment they were replying to. The implication being “I wasn’t the first with a condescending tone”.

[varjag]

Look I’m free to hold low opinion of Donald Trump supporters. While you/them don’t like it I don’t really care. Are we clear?

[includenotfound]

What is clear is that you strongly hold opinions that you're not willing to put money into, i.e. they're worthless (by your own account).

Thank you for the clarification.

[varjag]

I have tons of opinions but only a finite amount of money. Which are invested in the most boring way into long positions that am decidedly not liquidating on Monday in an attempt to time the crooks to impress an internet nobody.