US Election

[Star of David Bardsley]

I won't be reading the following hugbox where usual suspects will all console and like each other's posts in some therapy session. It's OK to be wrong.

How would you say the last few pages have gone as a score out of ten?

 

[O'l Gravy Leg.]

So let's get this right, he has asked you to provide information for your claim, you've responded, so he's challenged your lack of factual information and rather than provide quotes, or any other facts that validate your point you've chosen to stick your fingers in your ears and say la la la I can't hear you.

Fella you sound like an absolute clown, a rather childish, stupid clown.

So lets get this straight

I'm not a computer.

I made a post about how the electorate may see the rioting and looting and the lack of condeming it would be seen as an endorsement
Democrats endorsed it, by not preventing or condemning it.

It's called tacit endorsement. A democrat allowing a mob to take over a city block, and says it will be a summer of love, that can fairly be interpreted a tacit endorsement of rioting that took over a block, all its resident and businesses.

A good faith argument against that would have asked what I meant by endorsement, and I would have clarified that point.

but no, what he wanted was what I never claimed "Democratic politicians going into MSM and saying "I endorse these riots". That would be the only evidence he would accept, and he knows it's not what I said, I merely as a human might do, used loose language in part of my post. He wanted evidence for something I never claimed.

Take something, extract the meaning you want, play semantic games, claim win. There's a severe cognitive deficit on this thread

That's what he always does.

Then you all jump into your internet hugbox, lie about what transpired and jerk off

 

[Archers Road]

So lets get this straight

I'm not a computer.

I made a post about how the electorate may see the rioting and looting and the lack of condeming it would be seen as an endorsement
Democrats endorsed it, by not preventing or condemning it.

It's called tacit endorsement. A democrat allowing a mob to take over a city block, and says it will be a summer of love, that can fairly be interpreted a tacit endorsement of rioting that took over a block, all its resident and businesses.

A good faith argument against that would have asked what I meant by endorsement, and I would have clarified that point.

but no, what he wanted was what I never claimed "Democratic politicians going into MSM and saying "I endorse these riots". That would be the only evidence he would accept, and he knows it's not what I said, I merely as a human might do, used loose language in part of my post. He wanted evidence for something I never claimed.

Take something, extract the meaning you want, play semantic games, claim win. There's a severe cognitive deficit on this thread

That's what he always does.

Then you all jump into your internet hugbox, lie about what transpired and jerk off

So by endorsement, you meant tacit endorsement. Which isn’t endorsement at all. Gotcha.

 

[PINKIE]

100+ days of rioting and Antifa/BLM allowed to take over a city block, broadcast to the whole country (where half dont vote). The chop, and its top man was a rapper who was handing out AR15s to idiots who didnt even know how ot hold them, and people died.

The mayor of Portland and Gov of seattle cut free all the businesses and people who lived there, literally, left them to the scum that filled the void.

If you're not seeing what is going on, then I guess why you might resort to lazy claims of wishful thinking

Definitely wishful thinking if you think Oregon or Washington state are going to vote Republican. Washington is referred to as 'Democratopolis' as it's such a liberal leaning state.

 

[Treble]

I think it best Sisu doesn't try to post anything that requires facts or evidence. I wouldn't want him to start shutting down with everyone.

He should just stick to calling people nonces. That's about his level

 

[Willhoops]

So lets get this straight

I'm not a computer.

I made a post about how the electorate may see the rioting and looting and the lack of condeming it would be seen as an endorsement
Democrats endorsed it, by not preventing or condemning it.

It's called tacit endorsement. A democrat allowing a mob to take over a city block, and says it will be a summer of love, that can fairly be interpreted a tacit endorsement of rioting that took over a block, all its resident and businesses.

A good faith argument against that would have asked what I meant by endorsement, and I would have clarified that point.

but no, what he wanted was what I never claimed "Democratic politicians going into MSM and saying "I endorse these riots". That would be the only evidence he would accept, and he knows it's not what I said, I merely as a human might do, used loose language in part of my post. He wanted evidence for something I never claimed.

Take something, extract the meaning you want, play semantic games, claim win. There's a severe cognitive deficit on this thread

That's what he always does.

Then you all jump into your internet hugbox, lie about what transpired and jerk off

You've got a tactic called talking bollocks, have you found anything to support your claim? That was your claim, so no you haven't. The rest is just the bollocks to give yourself a sense of intelligence and self importance, the problem is the rest of us can see straight through you as you use a hundred words to say nothing at all, sadly you can't see the truth even if it punched you repeatedly in the face, which lets face it might clear the bollocks you have in your head

 

[Treble]

So by endorsement, you meant tacit endorsement. Which isn’t endorsement at all. Gotcha.

Makes sense, and Biden isn't a nonce he's a tacit nonce

 

[O'l Gravy Leg.]

You've got a tactic called talking bollocks, have you found anything to support your claim? That was your claim, so no you haven't. The rest is just the bollocks to give yourself a sense of intelligence and self importance, the problem is the rest of us can see straight through you as you use a hundred words to say nothing at all, sadly you can't see the truth even if it punched you repeatedly in the face, which lets face it might clear the bollocks you have in your head

my comment if kept in its context is the effect of tacit endorsement on senate seat elections
I said Democrats endorsed the looting and riots. That view showed up in the polls and was even discussed on CNN, that the electorate was seeing it as endorsement as I do too, because of political convenience, all of the groups were left wing or in Democrat run cities.


You could pick any one of thousands of posts on here, take one line, take it out of context, change its meaning and then ask for proof
"Democrats endorsed the looting and riots" (opinion) is rather different from "democrats stated they endorsed the riots and looting" (statement of fact)
Archers replaced my opinion with a statement of fact then asked for proof. You're all really bad at this

So anyone else can say things 100% nonsense, like the FBI says Proud Boys an extremist group. Everyone just agrees, even though it was 100% false. Almost every TDS driven claim on this thread is demonstrably false but old Sisu pisses people off when he fact checks some of the ****e.

Always the same people too, always

 

[Willhoops]

my claim if kept in its context is the effect of tacit endorsement on senate seat elections
I said Democrats endorsed the looting and riots. That view showed up in the polls and was even discussed on CNN, that the electorate was seeing it as endorsement as I do too, because of political convenience, all of the groups were left wing or in Democrat run cities.


You could pick any one of thousands of posts on here, take one line, take it out of context, change its meaning and then ask for proof
"Democrats endorsed the looting and riots" (opinion) is rather different from "democrats stated they endorsed the riots and looting" (statement of fact)
Archers replaced my opinion with a statement of fact then asked for proof. You're all really bad at this

So anyone else can say things 100% nonsense, like the FBI says Proud Boys an extremist group. Everyone just agrees, even though it was 100% false. Almost every claim on this thread is demonstrably false but old Sisu pisses people off when he fact checks some of the ****e.

Always the same people too, always

so you did say the democrats endorsed looting... care to provide evidence based stuff to back that up? I mean quotes, sponsorships etc

are you saying there is no extremism in the proud ****s? ****ing hell. You have been programmed well

 

[O'l Gravy Leg.]

so you did say the democrats endorsed looting... care to provide evidence based stuff to back that up? I mean quotes, sponsorships etc

are you saying there is no extremism in the proud ****s? ****ing hell. You have been programmed well

If I share an opinion like the democrats are endorsing looting and rioting. Then I provide reasons for holding that opinion, you can then understand why I came to that opinion
You can then argue why I am wrong on certain things, which may or may not change my opinion.

Then you take my statement of fact about Proud Boys, change it to opinion about "if they have some extremism" that I never even broached, then react to that opinion as if it were mine, and then tell me I am programmed


Your arguments are worse than fallacious, they are just downright silly

 

[Treble]

Summary:

Biden is a nonce, the democrats endorse looting.

Anything to back that up?

Errm here's a dodgy video and there's this Stand-Up comic and a couple of Youtube cranks I watched a few times.

Any credible evidence?

How dare you ask me such fallacious questions! I aint talking to you anymore.

 

[Willhoops]

If I share an opinion like the democrats are endorsing looting and rioting. Then I provide reasons for holding that opinion, you can then understand why I came to that opinion
You can then argue why I am wrong on certain things, which may or may not change my opinion.

Then you take my statement of fact about Proud Boys, change it to opinion about "if they have some extremism" that I never even broached, and then tell me I am programmed


Your arguments are worse than fallacious, they are just downright silly

I have come to the opinion you have fallen down a rabbit hole and are bring fed your opinions and due to your lack of critical thinking you are unable to distinguish facts and reality to an agenda that you are being led towards they give you the passages and you pass it on as something you have come to all by yourself. I have also come to the opinion this gives you a sense of faux intelligence that you think justifies your life and you don't get that there are thousands of you, posting the same old **** on a number of different forums and platforms, believing they know the truth yet you are nothing but another person sucked in and programmed.

Just my opinion though

 

[Willhoops]

Summary:

Biden is a nonce, the democrats endorse looting.

Anything to back that up?

Errm here's a dodgy video and there's this Stand-Up comic and a couple of Youtube cranks I watched a few times.

Any credible evidence?

How dare you ask me such fallacious questions! I aint talking to you anymore.

It's sad really, I've seen quotes like his nearly word for word on various platforms, the lack of deviation in a way is quite frightening considering they think they have come to these 'truths' by themselves

 

[O'l Gravy Leg.]

I have come to the opinion you have fallen down a rabbit hole and are bring fed your opinions and due to your lack of critical thinking you are unable to distinguish facts and reality to an agenda that you are being led towards they give you the passages and you pass it on as something you have come to all by yourself. I have also come to the opinion this gives you a sense of faux intelligence that you think justifies your life and you don't get that there are thousands of you, posting the same old **** on a number of different forums and platforms, believing they know the truth yet you are nothing but another person sucked in and programmed.

Just my opinion though

wtf did I just read?!

Fallen down rabbit hole
Fed opinions
Lack of critical thinking

it just goes on.

and you just brushed over every counter point in every reply like it never happened.
I tried to reply point for point with you, but this is full on angry delusion, how the **** do I respond to the insane accusations in this post

Starting to wonder if this PL board is literally an internet hugbox for lonely oddballs

 

[Willhoops]

wtf did I just read?!

Fallen down rabbit hole
Fed opinions
Lack of critical thinking

it just goes on.

and you just brushed over every counter point in every reply like it never happened.
I tried to reply point for point with you, but this is full on angry delusion, how the **** do I respond to the insane accusations in this post

It's clear you've lost the ability for critical thinking as I responded to Trebs, I've seen the same stuff pretty much word for word, the same links, the same sources mentioned, the same counters, the same deflections. The fact you can't see this shows how far gone you are. I'm not angry in the slightest, maybe amazed that you can't see you have been led to your opinions and not come to them yourself though, .... it won't mean anything as you have convinced yourself you know the truth and nothing will change that, kinda cultish

 

[O'l Gravy Leg.]

It's clear you've lost the ability for critical thinking as I responded to Trebs, I've seen the same stuff pretty much word for word, the same links, the same sources mentioned, the same counters, the same deflections. The fact you can't see this shows how far gone you are. I'm not angry in the slightest, maybe amazed that you can't see you have been led to your opinions and not come to them yourself though, .... it won't mean anything as you have convinced yourself you know the truth and nothing will change that, kinda cultish

Anyone can read my posts, no rebuttal to that ^needed.

Critical thinking, when you concocted a straw effigy of me 'to burn' in your last post
Critical thinking, you took what I said, changed it to what you wanted to hear and then reacted to it,
What would critical thinking say about attacking the messenger rather than the message?



I like the incredulous, the only reason I am continuing to read your posts at this point

 

[Willhoops]

Anyone can read my posts, no rebuttal to that ^needed.

Critical thinking, when you concocted a straw effigy of me 'to burn' in your last post
Critical thinking, you took what I said, changed it to what you wanted to hear and then reacted to it,
What would critical thinking say about attacking the messenger rather than the message?



I like the incredulous, the only reason I am continuing to read your posts at this point

30 odd words and says nothing at all

 

[O'l Gravy Leg.]

30 odd words and says nothing at all

By bringing up Critical thinking, like some hammer you had to smash me, you ended up

You must log in or register to see images

Not surprised.

I don't care to read anything else from you at this point, I'm already losing too many brain cells

take care and good luck, its internet, I don't even know let alone dislike you.

 

[Willhoops]

By bringing up Critical thinking, like some hammer you had to smash me, you ended up

You must log in or register to see images

Not surprised.

I don't care to read anything else from you at this point, I'm already losing too many brain cells

take care and good luck, its internet, I don't even know let alone dislike you.

And there we go

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Tobes]

The Senate you say....

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/senate/