^^your ilk (militant morons) are to blame

[Edited on December 21, 2020 at 11:57 PM. Reason : "militant progressive" lmao]

12/21/2020 11:45:15 PM

Good rational column on that same aoc/Dore shit
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/12/jimmy-dore-aoc-medicare-for-all-strategy.html

12/22/2020 12:32:30 PM

beat me to it

damn good column

12/22/2020 12:56:33 PM

They started out by falsely claiming that Dore was wrong about not blaming the chemical attack on Assad. Are people still pushing that? Then they went on to argue that when polls are worded in a way that sounds like they would be losing coverage, they don't support medicare for all therefore people actually don't support it that much.

Like there are people out there saying "Wait so If healthcare is covered by the government, I won't be able to keep sending checks to my insurance company anyway??? no thanks..."

They also argued that Biden winning is evidence people favor his healthcare proposals. The thing is, it was this same type of writing that scared a lot of people into voting for Biden because he was the only one who could beat Trump and that asking for too much (aka anything) would result in a Trump win.

People didn't favor Biden or his healthcare proposals but just went along with narratives like this that were mass-produced by corporate media and then pushed without any thought like we see in this thread.

[Edited on December 22, 2020 at 7:49 PM. Reason : biden was at like 9%]

12/22/2020 7:43:26 PM

Just to rub some salt in horosho's flesh wound of a debate he already lost:

Quote :

"Did all republicans lie about election results? Who did other than Trump?"

OK, here's a partial list:

Josh Hawley
Ted Cruz
Ron Johnson
James Lankford
Steve Daines
John Kennedy
Marsha Blackburn
Mike Braun
Cynthia Lummis
Roger Marshall
Bill Hagerty
Tommy Tuberville

Dumbass

1/3/2021 3:24:28 AM

Its almost like thats another example of lying to advance their bases' agenda.

1/3/2021 3:03:00 PM

It's almost like you still don't understand that "Lying to promote an agenda" is a subset of "Lying" and therefore contradicts the claim that Republicans are honest with their base.

1/3/2021 3:40:43 PM

They are literally doing this on behalf of their base. I'm sure those people all get thousands of calls demanding they do something to #stopthesteal, they promise to do something, and is this is them delivering on those type of promises. It doesn't have to be what you think is the truth for it to be honest.

Plus, if someone ran GOP and told voters 'i'll fight for you in DC against the fraudulent swampy democrats and their illegal votes' and then just conceded the election without a fight while millions are scream fraud, that'd make them dishonest even if the statement about the election is 100% true.

Yes its bullshit, but its exactly the type bullshit they were elected to carry out so stop changing the context of what I was saying to fit your strawman.

1/4/2021 12:39:53 AM

Quote :

"It doesn't have to be what you think is the truth for it to be honest."

But it's a lie, and therefore it's not honest.

QED

Quote :

"Yes its bullshit, but its exactly the type bullshit they were elected to carry out so stop changing the context of what I was saying to fit your strawman."

Bullshit. This is what you said:

Quote :

"Yes Dems are able to appeal to more groups of people but they accomplish that mostly through dishonesty and people are on to them. Its easy to appeal to almost everyone when you just lie and pretend to stand for everything while standing for almost nothing. Republicans appeal to a smaller base but they are honest to that base so its not going anywhere."

That's the original quote. The context makes it unambiguous you are talking about honesty versus lying.

You fucking liar

1/4/2021 12:58:56 AM

Quote :

" I'm sure those people all get thousands of calls demanding they do something to #stopthesteal, they promise to do something, and is this is them delivering on those type of promises."

Convenient of you to leave out the step where those same politicians gaslit their base with #stopthesteal (you know, the part that also contradicts your bullshit claim).

1/4/2021 1:20:20 AM

Quote :

""Yes Dems are able to appeal to more groups of people but they accomplish that mostly through dishonesty and people are on to them. Its easy to appeal to almost everyone when you just lie and pretend to stand for everything while standing for almost nothing. Republicans appeal to a smaller base but they are honest to that base so its not going anywhere.""

Take the first sentence into context and consider the whole statement. Republicans say things like this to appeal to their base because that is what their base wants to hear. Then, they go and back it up with action because they honestly want to overturn the election.

For many republicans, they would be revealed as dihonest to their base if they didn't try to fight the result of the election.

If I kill a man and hire a lawyer who says he can get me off then he shows up to court and says I did it, he was dishonest to me even though he told the truth.

1/4/2021 2:02:18 AM

Quote :

" Republicans say things like this to appeal to their base because that is what their base wants to hear"

Oh, so you mean they are being dishonest with them just because that's what they want to hear?!



I get you: You think that gaslighting their base is honesty so long as they simply follow through.

Bullshit.

That's something, sure, but it's for damn sure not "honesty".

1/4/2021 2:48:58 AM

Let me explain it to you this way:

An example of honesty would be these Republican politicians saying, "Hey, we're going to overturn this election simply because we want Trump to win".

(See, I do not doubt you when you say "they honestly want to overturn the election". That is obvious).

The dishonesty/gaslighting is when they say, "We're going to fight to overturn this election because Trump only lost due to fraudulent votes".

The justifications they give are where the dishonesty lies, dumbass (I really shouldn't have to spell that out for you).

1/4/2021 2:58:36 AM

he's going to make you spell everything out for him and otherwise get you to type lots and lots and lots of words

thus is a nature of a troll

1/4/2021 10:10:27 AM

We aren't even in disagreement here other than semantics/definitions of "honesty" and "gaslighting". The defense lawyer analogy works here because you are basically saying defense attorneys who believe their clients are guilty are gaslighting their clients and being dishonest with them by doing the job their client hired them to do and working towards and acquittal. You have it backwards because you are the family of the victim and cannot step out of your own perspective.

Quote :

"An example of honesty would be these Republican politicians saying, "Hey, we're going to overturn this election simply because we want Trump to win"."

Saying this out loud would guarantee failure. Obviously. No lawyer would start trial by saying "look, i'm pretty sure my client did it but I'm about to argue on his behalf because I want to win the case"

You're trying to intentionally misinterpret what I meant in my posts even after I've explained to you what I actually meant and what I didn't mean. All in the name of this weird fetish you have to "catch me" in a lie. You do this repeatedly.



[Edited on January 4, 2021 at 10:50 AM. Reason : k]

1/4/2021 10:44:26 AM

Quote :

"Saying this out loud would guarantee failure."

And saying anything else is dishonesty.

Buy yourself a dictionary and look up the word "honesty", you fucking moron.

1/4/2021 11:19:41 AM

Quote :

"We aren't even in disagreement here other than semantics/definitions of "honesty" and "gaslighting"."

Sure: You're wrong about the semantics/definitions and I'm right.

1/4/2021 11:23:44 AM

I said they were honest in a specific context. You're making no effort to correctly interpret that context and instead, trying to apply my words to a completely different topic and context due to some weird obsession you have with "winning". In addition to altering context, you're interpreting a general statement as an absolute. Saying someone is honest is not the same thing as saying "everything they ever say is true".

Discussions aren't just about your perspective but about listening to the other person's perspective.
You're derailing the entire discussion over something you're misinterpreting. If you put just a fraction of that effort into understanding what I initially meant, then we'd actually be able to have a discussion about how they are doing what they gave voters the impression they would do in the campaign.

It actually reminds me of the Jimmy Dore thing. No one actually believes M4A can pass into law right now but we want representatives who will act like they can achieve it and reveal pelosi is blocking it from the house floor...but representatives who ran on M4A are now telling us its unachievable. Well in that sense, it was dishonest to run on it without saying "but its unachievable" during the campaign but then get in office and finally tell the "truth". Thats what I mean by 'dishonesty with the base but honesty in power'.

[Edited on January 4, 2021 at 12:16 PM. Reason : where in the campaign was "I will differ to party leadership until we have the votes for change"]

1/4/2021 12:12:50 PM

Quote :

"I said they were honest in a specific context."

Nah, bro, I already posted your original quote which made it clear you were contrasting honesty versus telling lies, exactly as I claim you were.

1/4/2021 12:32:09 PM

Of course, if you would now like to retract that and amend your original comment, using words appropriate to their definition, I will take that amendment under consideration.

1/4/2021 12:34:46 PM

or you could just read all the posts and analogies I've made explaining what it meant.

1/4/2021 12:38:59 PM

Of course, you're free to continue making the same mistakes you're making.

You are under no coercion to improve your vocabulary.

1/4/2021 12:39:55 PM

If there was a better word I could've used then, you could let me know only after you correctly interpret the post. Until you understand the intent of the post, its impossible to evaluate the use of vocabulary. Of course there may have been a better way to write the post so that you didn't misinterpret it in the first place but its pretty obvious that you are intentionally misinterpreting it to manufacture a "win" because going back months to take isolated quotes out of context is your thing.

The issue is not if they were honest but what they were being honest about.

You interpreted the what as "everything all the time" when in reality the what was "appeal to their base" in the context of getting votes which was explicitly stated in the original quote and given further context through the discussion leading up to that.

Right now, fighting to overturn the election appeals to their base. Dog whistles about voter fraud during previous campaigns appealed to the base in the same way therefore the base was not deceived in the context of electing people who would "fight voter fraud" even if the very existence of voter fraud is not true.

Showing someone is dishonest about y does not prove they are dishonest about x.

1/4/2021 12:49:33 PM

Quote :

"or you could just read all the posts and analogies I've made explaining what it meant."

Or you could recall that I've still proven you wrong even given the amendments you refer to as your "explanations".

See, for example, how Republicans dishonestly campaign on reducing the debt, with no intention whatsoever to ever actually pursue that agenda.

1/4/2021 12:50:17 PM

Quote :

"If there was a better word I could've used then, you could let me know only after you correctly interpret the post."

Irrelevant. As I just pointed out, you would still be wrong.

1/4/2021 12:50:53 PM

Oh my god, will you two just get a fucking room and bang this out already

1/4/2021 10:37:48 PM

I've never seen someone bite this hard on a troll before

1/5/2021 12:12:24 PM

What if they're the same person

1/5/2021 12:19:22 PM

1/5/2021 3:04:29 PM

^^Honesty, I'm kinda offended by such an accusation.

Sincerely,
horosho

1/5/2021 3:08:58 PM

everybody i don't like is the same person

Quote :

"See, for example, how Republicans dishonestly campaign on reducing the debt, with no intention whatsoever to ever actually pursue that agenda."

Did you miss the recent debate about the stimulus? Many republicans are so intent on pursuing the agenda that it causes them to be conflicted over aid in the middle of a pandemic. They'd rather open things up and let the pandemic explode than close down, stop the pandemic, and expand the deficit through economic relief packages.

[Edited on January 5, 2021 at 3:40 PM. Reason : k]

1/5/2021 3:40:34 PM

Yeah, holla at me when Republicans actual reduce the annual deficit for a change instead of exploding it with the usual tax cuts.

1/5/2021 4:14:41 PM

^^even that was just more dishonesty. They would have gladly passed measures to greatly increases the debt if they could have, as long as the money was going to rich people and corporations and not poor people.

1/5/2021 5:32:36 PM

Roll out the impeachments tomorrow

1/6/2021 3:28:36 PM

^yep

1/6/2021 3:29:29 PM

Quote :

"The best way to show respect for the voters who believe the election was stolen is by telling them the truth."

-Mitt Romney

I'm glad to see at least some Republicans understand the actual definition of the word honesty.

1/6/2021 9:45:50 PM

Is mitt Romney a democrat

1/6/2021 9:50:14 PM

Nah, he's now a RINO, just like all the other Republicans who are honest with their base.

1/6/2021 10:01:10 PM

RINO, clearly.

1/6/2021 10:01:47 PM

So why is he in this thread

1/6/2021 10:10:32 PM

To contrast real honesty with horosho's bullshit claims of honesty (which he made in this thread).

1/6/2021 11:13:25 PM

You can make a new thread for that since it seems pretty off topic

1/6/2021 11:30:14 PM

Seems a little late for that since 1) It's been the predominant topic in this thread for the last couple of pages at least, and 2) Horosho's been suspended.

1/7/2021 12:16:14 AM

Quote :

"The House isn't coming back into session until after the inauguration. The Senate has adjourned until Jan. 19. Surreal cap to yesterday."

Complete embarrassing refusal to govern

1/7/2021 11:54:22 AM

So it looks like everyone's going to either remain silent, resign, or demand that someone else other than them do something about this.

1/7/2021 3:29:26 PM

Yep

1/7/2021 3:33:29 PM

Quote :

" @davisusan Speaker Pelosi just now: “I join the Senate Democratic leader in calling on the vice president to remove this president by immediately invoking the 25th amendment. If the vice president and cabinet do not act the Congress may be prepared to move forward with impeachment.”"

Lol at the “may” in the her statement.

1/7/2021 3:50:49 PM

Because impeachment went so well last time...

the 25th is NOT happening; impeachment/removal are NOT happening. We can only hope Twitter and FB continue to ban Trump and everyone else should just ignore him and let him play golf.

And I know people have an irrational hatred of the woman, and I'm certainly not one of her biggest fans, but WTF is she supposed to do? Nothing?

1/7/2021 5:04:07 PM

I think it's clear a few of us think she should impeach him?

And the last impeachment went "not well" partly bc of her leadership, but it def hurt his approval rating at the time. And maybe you were out of town yesterday, but some things have changed since then.

[Edited on January 7, 2021 at 5:17 PM. Reason : Use your fucking constitutional powers to check the executive! ]

1/7/2021 5:17:02 PM

Quote :

" And I know people have an irrational hatred of the woman, and I'm certainly not one of her biggest fans, but WTF is she supposed to do? Nothing? "

I was just pointing out how totally toothless the “may be prepared to move forward with impeachment” portion of that statement is. The word “may” basically nullifies the entire statement.

1/7/2021 5:24:05 PM