Yeah, problem is, you don't do much to advance your cause by some big nasty tantrum that makes attacks on people that have nothing to do with the reporter. "Sir, that question is ridiculous, next question." How hard is that?
If you go around saying the kinds of things he says, you can't exactly get mad when reporters ask you about it- that's what they do, whether you like it or not, it isn't personal. He finds every way to make himself out to be a victim when he brings it all upon himself.
I didn't see him playing the victim at all. I just saw someone saying F you I'm not playing your cancel game. Instead of asking about the fight or MMA, the reporter asks about some completely unrelated identity politics BS.
The reporter already knew what kind of guy Strickland was - what did he expect?
Even if you don't agree with him, the general public responds positively to people who don't give a fuck and and just wears their heart on their sleeve. People are sick of snowflakes who thinks everything is "problematic."
Sean was ALREADY playing the victim by his no cope behavior of flying off the handle at the reporter and (again) saying what he did and insulting others that have nothing to do with the guy; he talks shit that he knows will draw attention, then snivels like a little girl when a reporter asks him about it. He also played the victim with DDP, but we all saw that.I didn't see him playing the victim at all. I just saw someone saying F you I'm not playing your cancel game. Instead of asking about the fight or MMA, the reporter asks about some completely unrelated identity politics BS.
The reporter already knew what kind of guy Strickland was - what did he expect?
Even if you don't agree with him, the general public responds positively to people who don't give a fuck and and just wears their heart on their sleeve. People are sick of snowflakes who thinks everything is "problematic."
Sean was ALREADY playing the victim by his no cope behavior of flying off the handle at him and (again) saying what he did and insulting others that have nothing to do with a guy; he talks shit he knows draws attention, then snivels like a little girl when a reporter asks him about it. He also played the victim with DDP, but we all saw that.
Wearing your heart on your sleeve has nothing to do with; this is about emotional regulation. When I worked in prison, I saw that it was where people often end up who aggressively flew off the handle, that's the type of results you get when you decide to leave the civilized world and act like an impulsive animal.
Sean is technically a big-time snowflake if you look at the bigger picture. Truly emo and sensitive; he just tried to shake it off with all of this kind of talk. He can't hide it much as he tries.
Fine line between lgbtq wokeness and mental illness.Fine line between straight shooter and borderline Neanderthal
What if you in fact WERE talking to such a person hypothetically, what would you think then?Yea I think you're reaching and playing armchair psychologist.
What if you in fact WERE talking to such a person hypothetically, what would you think then?
But would it change the way you looked at the text? You said it was armchair psychology, what would you think if it wasn't?I would think he's being a funny troll.
But would it change the way you looked at the text? You said it was armchair psychology, what would you think if it wasn't?
- sean is unphased, owned up to the bullshit. confident, talking good on the mic
- DDP also confident, this is going to be a great fight
- you may not agree, but alot more people do with what he says
- AK Lee is a nerd who used this opportunity to try to "get him" by digging up old tweets
- I hope Mayra beats Raquel too. She's talking smack in a second language, far more impressive
- WAR SEAN STRICKLAND!!!!! LETS GO!!!!!
i'm thinking the bullet method is the way to go. thank you sir.Excellent rundown/analysis, nice and succinct in bullet form without writing a novel.
Agree with everything, except am leaning Raquel. I appreciate Mayra's sentiment but nobody loves Sean more than me.
What I am getting at is- you rebutted my post by saying basically you thought it was faulty because I was using armchair psychology. If I actually had those credentials in psychology, would you then give credibility to what I wrote since it would be provably false to say it was "armchair psychology?"I don't understand what you're getting at.
What I am getting at is- you rebutted my post by saying basically you thought it was faulty because I was using armchair psychology. If I actually had those credentials in psychology, would you then give credibility to what I wrote since it would be provably false to say it was "armchair psychology?"