2024 Primary

[UNI88]

Who do you think and why is it relevant? What little gotcha are your trying to get to?

Why do you describe it as an attempted coup?

Because like January 6, it was an attempt to overturn the results of the an election.

Before you attempt to obfuscate by asking for some kind of explanation go back and read Ganny's many posts on the topic. He's done an excellent job of explaining why it could be considered a coup and why it really backfired when trump actually did something worthy of impeachment.

[kalm]

Why do you describe it as an attempted coup?

Because like January 6, it was an attempt to overturn the results of the an election.

Before you attempt to obfuscate by asking for some kind of explanation go back and read Ganny's many posts on the topic. He's done an excellent job of explaining why it could be considered a coup and why it really backfired when trump actually did something worthy of impeachment.

That’s why I asked. The impeachment “coup” would have resulted in the VP or someone else from Trump’s cabinet ascending to President. Going beyond that wanders deeper into conspiracy theory.

The two are not even close to the same. This where the ideology of “both sides do it” gets in trouble. It obscures reality.

Do obscure and obfuscation come from the same origin?

[UNI88]

Because like January 6, it was an attempt to overturn the results of the an election.

Before you attempt to obfuscate by asking for some kind of explanation go back and read Ganny's many posts on the topic. He's done an excellent job of explaining why it could be considered a coup and why it really backfired when trump actually did something worthy of impeachment.

That’s why I asked. The impeachment “coup” would have resulted in the VP or someone else from Trump’s cabinet ascending to President. Going beyond that wanders deeper into conspiracy theory.

The two are not even close to the same. This where the ideology of “both sides do it” gets in trouble. It obscures reality.

Do obscure and obfuscation come from the same origin?

They were both attempts to overturn the results of a free and fair election because the loser wasn't happy with losing.

The first impeachment also had the unintended consequence of poisoning the well so the second and this time valid impeachment failed.

Donks own both of those and no arguing that they're not the same as January 6 will change that.

You know what else obscures reality? The my side isn't as bad as the other side defense.

[houndawg]

That’s why I asked. The impeachment “coup” would have resulted in the VP or someone else from Trump’s cabinet ascending to President. Going beyond that wanders deeper into conspiracy theory.

The two are not even close to the same. This where the ideology of “both sides do it” gets in trouble. It obscures reality.

Do obscure and obfuscation come from the same origin?

They were both attempts to overturn the results of a free and fair election because the loser wasn't happy with losing.

The first impeachment also had the unintended consequence of poisoning the well so the second and this time valid impeachment failed.

Donks own both of those and no arguing that they're not the same as January 6 will change that.

You know what else obscures reality? The my side isn't as bad as the other side defense.

Nevertheless its true in this case.

[UNI88]

They were both attempts to overturn the results of a free and fair election because the loser wasn't happy with losing.

The first impeachment also had the unintended consequence of poisoning the well so the second and this time valid impeachment failed.

Donks own both of those and no arguing that they're not the same as January 6 will change that.

You know what else obscures reality? The my side isn't as bad as the other side defense.

Nevertheless its true in this case.

Sure it is. You and kalm are convinced it’s true in one direction and SG and BDK are sure it’s true in the other. You’re all equally delusional.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

Nevertheless its true in this case.

Sure it is. You and kalm are convinced it’s true in one direction and SG and BDK are sure it’s true in the other. You’re all equally delusional.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If only the rest of us could be more like you, the world would be such a better place.

[kalm]

Because like January 6, it was an attempt to overturn the results of the an election.

Before you attempt to obfuscate by asking for some kind of explanation go back and read Ganny's many posts on the topic. He's done an excellent job of explaining why it could be considered a coup and why it really backfired when trump actually did something worthy of impeachment.

That’s why I asked. The impeachment “coup” would have resulted in the VP or someone else from Trump’s cabinet ascending to President. Going beyond that wanders deeper into conspiracy theory.

The two are not even close to the same. This where the ideology of “both sides do it” gets in trouble. It obscures reality.

Do obscure and obfuscation come from the same origin?

You’re wandering back and forth between what is fact and opinion and that’s ok. You have to sometimes to remain a centrist in a fluid system where the center is always shifting.

[kalm]

Sure it is. You and kalm are convinced it’s true in one direction and SG and BDK are sure it’s true in the other. You’re all equally delusional.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If only the rest of us could be more like you, the world would be such a better place.

The delusion of the “middle” leads to apathy and sometimes regression.


Sad.

[GannonFan]

You’re wandering back and forth between what is fact and opinion and that’s ok. You have to sometimes to remain a centrist in a fluid system where the center is always shifting.

The delusion of the “middle” leads to apathy and sometimes regression.


Sad.

As you've done many times before and have had to been corrected on many times before, being a "centrist" or in the "middle" doesn't mean any of those things you suggest. Rather, it's always been a position on the political spectrum where folks reside who don't buy-in fully to either partisan side of the political spectrum, and instead, depending on the issue or the point of discussion, listen to both sides and only then decide, for that specific issue, which side they lean towards.

I get it, you're a pretty diehard partisan (your post-partisan schtick has long since been debunked as posturing), it's difficult to wrap your head around the idea that you're not always correct and that the other side of the political argument is not actually, always, the devil incarnate. But you really diminish yourself by trying to castigate folks for having the temerity to thoughtfully approach political issues and judge them on their merits rather than on the talking points of the political extremes. But being the partisan you are, I'm sure that doesn't even bother you, you're past those concerns of rationally approaching a topic. How splendid for you.

[kalm]

You’re wandering back and forth between what is fact and opinion and that’s ok. You have to sometimes to remain a centrist in a fluid system where the center is always shifting.

The delusion of the “middle” leads to apathy and sometimes regression.


Sad.

As you've done many times before and have had to been corrected on many times before, being a "centrist" or in the "middle" doesn't mean any of those things you suggest. Rather, it's always been a position on the political spectrum where folks reside who don't buy-in fully to either partisan side of the political spectrum, and instead, depending on the issue or the point of discussion, listen to both sides and only then decide, for that specific issue, which side they lean towards.

I get it, you're a pretty diehard partisan (your post-partisan schtick has long since been debunked as posturing), it's difficult to wrap your head around the idea that you're not always correct and that the other side of the political argument is not actually, always, the devil incarnate. But you really diminish yourself by trying to castigate folks for having the temerity to thoughtfully approach political issues and judge them on their merits rather than on the talking points of the political extremes. But being the partisan you are, I'm sure that doesn't even bother you, you're past those concerns of rationally approaching a topic. How splendid for you.

You’re defending centrism in a complex and flawed two party system where the center constantly shifts.

Partisanship in such a system is tied to party. In that regard I’m post partisan as I see the flaws and take issue with both sides in accordance to my values. Those values tend to fall on the left side of the political spectrum with an underlying backdrop of libertarianism.

We are social apes that are best served through cooperation and community.

Try to not crap the environmental bed you sleep in but when you do, clean it up.

True freedom transcends race, country, religion, sexual orientation, and (in specific, limited situations) even the individual.

Government is a necessary evil. There can be both too much and too little.

Best of luck!

[GannonFan]

As you've done many times before and have had to been corrected on many times before, being a "centrist" or in the "middle" doesn't mean any of those things you suggest. Rather, it's always been a position on the political spectrum where folks reside who don't buy-in fully to either partisan side of the political spectrum, and instead, depending on the issue or the point of discussion, listen to both sides and only then decide, for that specific issue, which side they lean towards.

I get it, you're a pretty diehard partisan (your post-partisan schtick has long since been debunked as posturing), it's difficult to wrap your head around the idea that you're not always correct and that the other side of the political argument is not actually, always, the devil incarnate. But you really diminish yourself by trying to castigate folks for having the temerity to thoughtfully approach political issues and judge them on their merits rather than on the talking points of the political extremes. But being the partisan you are, I'm sure that doesn't even bother you, you're past those concerns of rationally approaching a topic. How splendid for you.

You’re defending centrism in a complex and flawed two party system where the center constantly shifts.

Partisanship in such a system is tied to party. In that regard I’m post partisan as I see the flaws and take issue with both sides in accordance to my values. Those values tend to fall on the left side of the political spectrum with an underlying backdrop of libertarianism.

We are social apes that are best served through cooperation and community.

Try to not crap the environmental bed you sleep in but when you do, clean it up.

True freedom transcends race, country, religion, sexual orientation, and (in specific, limited situations) even the individual.

Government is a necessary evil. There can be both too much and too little.

Best of luck!

So you're a centrist then. It's okay to admit it.

[kalm]

You’re defending centrism in a complex and flawed two party system where the center constantly shifts.

Partisanship in such a system is tied to party. In that regard I’m post partisan as I see the flaws and take issue with both sides in accordance to my values. Those values tend to fall on the left side of the political spectrum with an underlying backdrop of libertarianism.

We are social apes that are best served through cooperation and community.

Try to not crap the environmental bed you sleep in but when you do, clean it up.

True freedom transcends race, country, religion, sexual orientation, and (in specific, limited situations) even the individual.

Government is a necessary evil. There can be both too much and too little.

Best of luck!

So you're a centrist then. It's okay to admit it.

Of course I am silly. And the American voter according to years of polling is progressive on nearly every big issue from government corruption to monopolistic financial markets to drug legalization to increased wages to lgbtq rights to sensible gun control.

It’s not my fault you guys picked a bad time to defend the conservative right.

[UNI88]

That’s why I asked. The impeachment “coup” would have resulted in the VP or someone else from Trump’s cabinet ascending to President. Going beyond that wanders deeper into conspiracy theory.

The two are not even close to the same. This where the ideology of “both sides do it” gets in trouble. It obscures reality.

Do obscure and obfuscation come from the same origin?

You’re wandering back and forth between what is fact and opinion and that’s ok. You have to sometimes to remain a centrist in a fluid system where the center is always shifting.

You just told yourself that "You’re wandering back and forth between what is fact and opinion and that’s ok."

[Winterborn]

So you're a centrist then. It's okay to admit it.

Of course I am silly. And the American voter according to years of polling is progressive on nearly every big issue from government corruption to monopolistic financial markets to drug legalization to increased wages to lgbtq rights to sensible gun control.

It’s not my fault you guys picked a bad time to defend the conservative right.

Like all polls (and opinions), it comes down to the details. But then you knew that.

[GannonFan]

So you're a centrist then. It's okay to admit it.

Of course I am silly. And the American voter according to years of polling is progressive on nearly every big issue from government corruption to monopolistic financial markets to drug legalization to increased wages to lgbtq rights to sensible gun control.

It’s not my fault you guys picked a bad time to defend the conservative right.

I'm not aware that I'm defending the conservative right, but as the kids used to say, "you go on with your bad self".

Btw, on your list that you claim has been polled, who's really for government corruption and monopolistic financial markets? I don't really see those on many placards and people actively pushing for those things, left or right.

[Winterborn]

Of course I am silly. And the American voter according to years of polling is progressive on nearly every big issue from government corruption to monopolistic financial markets to drug legalization to increased wages to lgbtq rights to sensible gun control.

It’s not my fault you guys picked a bad time to defend the conservative right.

I'm not aware that I'm defending the conservative right, but as the kids used to say, "you go on with your bad self".

Btw, on your list that you claim has been polled, who's really for government corruption and monopolistic financial markets? I don't really see those on many placards and people actively pushing for those things, left or right.

I figured he was just trolling and decided to take a nibble.

[UNI88]

Sure it is. You and kalm are convinced it’s true in one direction and SG and BDK are sure it’s true in the other. You’re all equally delusional.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If only the rest of us could be more like you, the world would be such a better place.

Unless you're Abraham, you don't have enough years left on this planet to attain my level of enlightenment ...

[Winterborn]

If only the rest of us could be more like you, the world would be such a better place.

Unless you're Methuselah, you don't have enough years left on this planet to attain my level of enlightenment ...

FYP

[kalm]

Of course I am silly. And the American voter according to years of polling is progressive on nearly every big issue from government corruption to monopolistic financial markets to drug legalization to increased wages to lgbtq rights to sensible gun control.

It’s not my fault you guys picked a bad time to defend the conservative right.

I'm not aware that I'm defending the conservative right, but as the kids used to say, "you go on with your bad self".

Btw, on your list that you claim has been polled, who's really for government corruption and monopolistic financial markets? I don't really see those on many placards and people actively pushing for those things, left or right.

In this case and few others we discuss, false equivalencies are enabling.

Well healed special interests benefit from corruption and monopolies. In fact, they pay handsomely for it…a cost of doing business.

Let me guess…you still think money is speech and have never heard of ALEC or Blackrock, or the Federalist Society.

[houndawg]

If only the rest of us could be more like you, the world would be such a better place.

Unless you're Abraham, you don't have enough years left on this planet to attain my level of enlightenment ...

My morning dump has attained your level of enlightenment...

[Winterborn]

I'm not aware that I'm defending the conservative right, but as the kids used to say, "you go on with your bad self".

Btw, on your list that you claim has been polled, who's really for government corruption and monopolistic financial markets? I don't really see those on many placards and people actively pushing for those things, left or right.

In this case and few others we discuss, false equivalencies are enabling.

Well healed special interests benefit from corruption and monopolies. In fact, they pay handsomely for it…a cost of doing business.

Let me guess…you still think money is speech and have never heard of ALEC or Blackrock, or the Federalist Society.

Interesting, you give 3 examples all from one side of the political spectrum. Your centralist position seems to be off to a rocky start.

[kalm]

In this case and few others we discuss, false equivalencies are enabling.

Well healed special interests benefit from corruption and monopolies. In fact, they pay handsomely for it…a cost of doing business.

Let me guess…you still think money is speech and have never heard of ALEC or Blackrock, or the Federalist Society.

Interesting, you give 3 examples all from one side of the political spectrum. Your centralist position seems to be off to a rocky start.

Again, not my fault these are easy examples although ALEC at least used to portray themselves as neutral and certainly worked with legislators and groups from both sides. I’m guessing Blackrock is the same. Maybe there’s a pay to play court system influence that rivals the Fed Soc as well? Dunno.

[Winterborn]

Interesting, you give 3 examples all from one side of the political spectrum. Your centralist position seems to be off to a rocky start.

Again, not my fault these are easy examples although ALEC at least used to portray themselves as neutral and certainly worked with legislators and groups from both sides. I’m guessing Blackrock is the same. Maybe there’s a pay to play court system influence that rivals the Fed Soc as well? Dunno.

Just giving you lip on your probation period.

[kalm]

Again, not my fault these are easy examples although ALEC at least used to portray themselves as neutral and certainly worked with legislators and groups from both sides. I’m guessing Blackrock is the same. Maybe there’s a pay to play court system influence that rivals the Fed Soc as well? Dunno.

Just giving you lip on your probation period.

You dirty rotten son of a bitch!

[Winterborn]

Just giving you lip on your probation period.

You dirty rotten son of a bitch!

Most days I am.