Jump to content


The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Fox news still pushing Tulsi.  I wonder why:dunno

 

 

 

 

It's pretty transparent who she works for.

 

I'd also love to know where she gets this "49%" want her in the debates. She came in behind several people who aren't even running anymore in the last primaries. 

Link to comment

42 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

That isn’t what he’s saying. 

It's literally what he said.

 

39 minutes ago, knapplc said:

And I don't know why we have to play this game.  The message "Everyone should vote against Trump" isn't that controversial.

Then make the case but don't resort to illogical narratives like "not A is the same as A". It undercuts whatever message you're trying for because it's clearly untrue.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
Just now, RedDenver said:

It's literally what he said.

 

Then make the case but don't resort to illogical narratives like "not A is the same as A". It undercuts whatever message you're trying for because it's clearly untrue.

 

I've really enjoyed this conversation.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

It's pretty transparent who she works for.

 

I'd also love to know where she gets this "49%" want her in the debates. She came in behind several people who aren't even running anymore in the last primaries. 

49% are from Trump supporters and Russian agents :o  maybe they are the same thing :dunno

  • Haha 1
Link to comment

4 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

I don't think it's controversial to say a third-party vote in our system is a wasted vote. But that's just my opinion. And most states are not competitive so it doesn't matter there anyway.

 

Any vote in Nebraska that isn't red (National stage) won't matter much anyway...

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

You know that what he means is not voting for Trump's opponent is the same as voting for Trump. It's fine to argue with that, but it's clear he didn't mean what you're saying he meant.

I'd just let it go, but he's arguing for people who might vote third party or not vote at all to instead vote for Trump. I know that's not his intention, but that's an unintended consequence of his argument.

 

17 minutes ago, knapplc said:

We had this debate in 2016. I'm not interested in repeating it.

You're the one making the argument. Repeatedly.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

4 hours ago, TGHusker said:

Fox news still pushing Tulsi.  I wonder why:dunno

 

 

 

Perhaps the reasons are: 

1. Her situation points out exactly how exclusionary the DNC and Dem party as a whole is to someone who does not toe the party line (group think)

2. She's a reasonable and honorable (from what I know about her) human being unlike the 2 geezers that are remaining

3. This is yet another example of the hypocrisy of the Democrat party in regards to gender and ethnicity and it shows how utterly full of crap the entire party is

 

That's a few good reasons aside from the bogus conspiracy theories that are championed here

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

I'd just let it go, but he's arguing for people who might vote third party or not vote at all to instead vote for Trump. I know that's not his intention, but that's an unintended consequence of his argument.

 

You're the one making the argument. Repeatedly.

You're absolutely right on this. 

 

And out of curiosity, what 3rd party candidate(s) are you considering voting for instead? 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

You're absolutely right on this. 

 

And out of curiosity, what 3rd party candidate(s) are you considering voting for instead? 

I'm almost certainly voting for the Dem nominee because I agree with the intention behind knapplc's posts. I think it's the wrong way to argue it though.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...