Is the Democratic Party waking up?

[Mac1958]

And once again, we see the first line of my sig right here, in all its glory:

1. >>> It's not about "Left vs. Right". It's about the FUNDAMENTALISTS on BOTH ends vs. a MAJORITY of America. THAT is MY "side of the fence".

Still waiting for that list of bigoted far left Democrats. Where are they?

There is a long list. But I have already told you why I don't bother providing examples for people like you.

You saw that, but you're pretending you didn't. Because you're dishonest.
.

It's obviously an excuse. Name 3, how hard could that be? Yes, I may have a follow up to whoever you name, sorry but why do you think you deserve the last word anyway? For a forum that is all about debate it's weird how you make excuses from not doing so.

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends.

You're welcome.
.

 

[HappyJoy]

Oh, Mac, I've stopped listenidng to how you like to position yourself. After all you won't even defend it so why should I care what you call yourself?

Well, ain't this interesting.

You guys are bitching and moaning and whining that I don't take you seriously, and then you say this.

Gawd, I love this place.
.

I've never bitched or moaned about you not taking me seriously. It's you not taking your own positions seriously enough to defend them.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm not a moderate. I have never claimed to be a moderate. The second line of my sig says: For the liars who pretend I claim to be a centrist/moderate/impartial/unbiased/fence-sitter: Come on Jake, man up, just this once.

This is just another great example of why I no longer bother. You people make up stuff and then attack based on that. So, thanks for the latest example.

I've had it with the dishonesty. Trying to communicate with people like you is pointless.

I agree, you are not a moderate.

What you are is someone who wants a political movement that is economically conservative and socially liberal. In short, something that no one outside of the Wall Street parasites would vote for.

Bernie is surging because that "centrist" model of "Third Way" Democrats isn't working for people anymore. Not for the kid with Six figures in debt working at Starbucks, not for the black kid in the ghetto with no job prospects.

 

[HappyJoy]

And once again, we see the first line of my sig right here, in all its glory:

1. >>> It's not about "Left vs. Right". It's about the FUNDAMENTALISTS on BOTH ends vs. a MAJORITY of America. THAT is MY "side of the fence".

Still waiting for that list of bigoted far left Democrats. Where are they?

There is a long list. But I have already told you why I don't bother providing examples for people like you.

You saw that, but you're pretending you didn't. Because you're dishonest.
.

It's obviously an excuse. Name 3, how hard could that be? Yes, I may have a follow up to whoever you name, sorry but why do you think you deserve the last word anyway? For a forum that is all about debate it's weird how you make excuses from not doing so.

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends.

You're welcome.
.

How are they bigots?

 

[Mac1958]

Oh, Mac, I've stopped listenidng to how you like to position yourself. After all you won't even defend it so why should I care what you call yourself?

Well, ain't this interesting.

You guys are bitching and moaning and whining that I don't take you seriously, and then you say this.

Gawd, I love this place.
.

I've never bitched or moaned about you not taking me seriously. It's you not taking your own positions seriously enough to defend them.

So you know what's in my mind, and it can't be that I'm just being honest.

Anything else? Are you done?
.

 

[Correll]

I have no problem with the idea of judgement. But be prepared to defense your reasons for it.

I feel zero (0) obligation to defend my opinions when I know I'm in an asymmetrical conversation. They are a waste of time. I'm burned out on them.

Further, I no longer come here in search of interesting conversation (although I do stumble into it from time to time). I come here to observe behaviors and occasionally belch out my opinion when the mood strikes (which allows me to observe even MORE behaviors).

I do think it's funny when wingers here complain that I don't respect their intellectually dishonest, hyper-partisan, comically one-sided opinions. Most of them are the same people who clearly find it perfectly reasonable to launch nasty, personal insults and attacks on other parts of this very forum, and then expect me to take them seriously.

You're certainly free to turn my threads into bitch-fests about me. All they do is cement my opinions. Otherwise, I just don't care.
.

Make a harsh judgement and refuse to even discuss it? And I'm just supposed to let it stand without challenge?


That is not reasonable. That is fairly trollish behavior.


It has a lot of similarity to the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

Challenge it all you want.
.

Ok.


I am not a "winger". You are too quick to call people wingers, and are not fair in comparing and contrasting right vs left behavior.


The sides are NOT equivalent.


As I said, nothing about Trump, even comes close to justifying the reaction from the Left.


And your blaming Trump for how the Left is behaving, is not reasonable.

Yes, the sides are not equivalent.

Nor have I ever said they are.

But it's in your minds that I have.

And that's on both ends, of course.

Well, when you refuse to discuss your position, and make comments and then blow off responses, we have to fill in the blanks based on what your position seems to be.


That bit, where you refuse to condemn the Charlottesville Lie, and still hold Trump at least partially responsible for that issue, it casts a bad light over everything Mac related, in my perception.

 

[Mac1958]

And once again, we see the first line of my sig right here, in all its glory:

1. >>> It's not about "Left vs. Right". It's about the FUNDAMENTALISTS on BOTH ends vs. a MAJORITY of America. THAT is MY "side of the fence".

Still waiting for that list of bigoted far left Democrats. Where are they?

There is a long list. But I have already told you why I don't bother providing examples for people like you.

You saw that, but you're pretending you didn't. Because you're dishonest.
.

It's obviously an excuse. Name 3, how hard could that be? Yes, I may have a follow up to whoever you name, sorry but why do you think you deserve the last word anyway? For a forum that is all about debate it's weird how you make excuses from not doing so.

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends.

You're welcome.
.

How are they bigots?

Look up the definition.

I let you play "20 Questions" yesterday. Not today.

Make a clear point. For a change.
.

 

[Mac1958]

I feel zero (0) obligation to defend my opinions when I know I'm in an asymmetrical conversation. They are a waste of time. I'm burned out on them.

Further, I no longer come here in search of interesting conversation (although I do stumble into it from time to time). I come here to observe behaviors and occasionally belch out my opinion when the mood strikes (which allows me to observe even MORE behaviors).

I do think it's funny when wingers here complain that I don't respect their intellectually dishonest, hyper-partisan, comically one-sided opinions. Most of them are the same people who clearly find it perfectly reasonable to launch nasty, personal insults and attacks on other parts of this very forum, and then expect me to take them seriously.

You're certainly free to turn my threads into bitch-fests about me. All they do is cement my opinions. Otherwise, I just don't care.
.

Make a harsh judgement and refuse to even discuss it? And I'm just supposed to let it stand without challenge?


That is not reasonable. That is fairly trollish behavior.


It has a lot of similarity to the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

Challenge it all you want.
.

Ok.


I am not a "winger". You are too quick to call people wingers, and are not fair in comparing and contrasting right vs left behavior.


The sides are NOT equivalent.


As I said, nothing about Trump, even comes close to justifying the reaction from the Left.


And your blaming Trump for how the Left is behaving, is not reasonable.

Yes, the sides are not equivalent.

Nor have I ever said they are.

But it's in your minds that I have.

And that's on both ends, of course.

Well, when you refuse to discuss your position, and make comments and then blow off responses, we have to fill in the blanks based on what your position seems to be.


That bit, where you refuse to condemn the Charlottesville Lie, and still hold Trump at least partially responsible for that issue, it casts a bad light over everything Mac related, in my perception.

Okay!
.

 

[HappyJoy]

Oh, Mac, I've stopped listenidng to how you like to position yourself. After all you won't even defend it so why should I care what you call yourself?

Well, ain't this interesting.

You guys are bitching and moaning and whining that I don't take you seriously, and then you say this.

Gawd, I love this place.
.

I've never bitched or moaned about you not taking me seriously. It's you not taking your own positions seriously enough to defend them.

So you know what's in my mind, and it can't be that I'm just being honest.

Anything else? Are you done?
.

You make claims that you never back up. So, yeah.

 

[HappyJoy]

Still waiting for that list of bigoted far left Democrats. Where are they?

There is a long list. But I have already told you why I don't bother providing examples for people like you.

You saw that, but you're pretending you didn't. Because you're dishonest.
.

It's obviously an excuse. Name 3, how hard could that be? Yes, I may have a follow up to whoever you name, sorry but why do you think you deserve the last word anyway? For a forum that is all about debate it's weird how you make excuses from not doing so.

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends.

You're welcome.
.

How are they bigots?

Look up the definition.

I let you play "20 Questions" yesterday. Not today.

Make a clear point. For a change.
.

Just answer the question. How is AOC a bigot? How did you come to the conclusion that the Democratic party is infiltrated or being lead astray (paraphrasing) by bigots?

 

[JoeB131]

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends.

You're welcome.

Wow, you couldn't even come up with names for the other two, but let's assume you are talking about Tailb and Omar. You know, the scary Muslims that have you wetting yourself.

So 3 members out of a Congressional Delegation of 380 Democrats in Congress.

(Won't count Bernie because he's an independent.)

The ironic thing is that if Bloomberg elbows his way to the big boy table, the two top contenders for the Democratic nomination won't actually be Democrats.

 

[Mac1958]

There is a long list. But I have already told you why I don't bother providing examples for people like you.

You saw that, but you're pretending you didn't. Because you're dishonest.
.

It's obviously an excuse. Name 3, how hard could that be? Yes, I may have a follow up to whoever you name, sorry but why do you think you deserve the last word anyway? For a forum that is all about debate it's weird how you make excuses from not doing so.

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends.

You're welcome.
.

How are they bigots?

Look up the definition.

I let you play "20 Questions" yesterday. Not today.

Make a clear point. For a change.
.

Just answer the question. How is AOC a bigot? How did you come to the conclusion that the Democratic party is infiltrated or being lead astray (paraphrasing) by bigots?

Observation.
.

 

[HappyJoy]

It's obviously an excuse. Name 3, how hard could that be? Yes, I may have a follow up to whoever you name, sorry but why do you think you deserve the last word anyway? For a forum that is all about debate it's weird how you make excuses from not doing so.

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends.

You're welcome.
.

How are they bigots?

Look up the definition.

I let you play "20 Questions" yesterday. Not today.

Make a clear point. For a change.
.

Just answer the question. How is AOC a bigot? How did you come to the conclusion that the Democratic party is infiltrated or being lead astray (paraphrasing) by bigots?

Observation.
.

Once again Mac you make claims and when questioned can't or are unable to back them up. Just to be clear, while the topic of this forum is politics the issue at hand is really about you.

 

[Mac1958]

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends.

You're welcome.
.

How are they bigots?

Look up the definition.

I let you play "20 Questions" yesterday. Not today.

Make a clear point. For a change.
.

Just answer the question. How is AOC a bigot? How did you come to the conclusion that the Democratic party is infiltrated or being lead astray (paraphrasing) by bigots?

Observation.
.

Once again Mac you make claims and when questioned can't or are unable to back them up.

Or I don't bother. Run with whichever you want.
.

 

[HappyJoy]

How are they bigots?

Look up the definition.

I let you play "20 Questions" yesterday. Not today.

Make a clear point. For a change.
.

Just answer the question. How is AOC a bigot? How did you come to the conclusion that the Democratic party is infiltrated or being lead astray (paraphrasing) by bigots?

Observation.
.

Once again Mac you make claims and when questioned can't or are unable to back them up.

Or I don't bother. Run with whichever you want.
.

No, you didn't bother. Make claims, run away it's your MO regardless of who is replying to you.

 

[dblack]

I don't see the Democrats waking up. They're still convinced that the voters who have rejected them "just don't understand". They have yet to question the principles they are selling, or why people aren't buying.

 

[candycorn]

I don't see the Democrats waking up. They're still convinced that the voters who have rejected them "just don't understand". They have yet to question the principles they are selling, or why people aren't buying.

The last Dem Nominee got 3M more votes than the blob. Not too sure it’s a message issue.

 

[SAYIT]

Sure, AOC and her two congressional friends. You're welcome.

Wow, you couldn't even come up with names for the other two, but let's assume you are talking about Tailb and Omar. You know, the scary Muslims that have you wetting yourself. So 3 members out of a Congressional Delegation of 380 Democrats in Congress.

How did you come up with 380 congressional Dems?

 

[Mac1958]

I don't see the Democrats waking up. They're still convinced that the voters who have rejected them "just don't understand". They have yet to question the principles they are selling, or why people aren't buying.

The unknown here is how far the infection has really hit the party.

As with anything political, it's the loudest voices that get the most attention and ultimately have the most influence. But several Democrats have spoken out, and I know there are many traditional Democrats who don't like what they're seeing. The problem is that, by their very nature, they're less likely to be the ones screaming and losing their shit.

So the question to me is whether enough momentum can be started and maintained for the nutters to be marginalized.
.

 

[SAYIT]

I don't see the Democrats waking up. They're still convinced that the voters who have rejected them "just don't understand". They have yet to question the principles they are selling, or why people aren't buying.

The last Dem Nominee got 3M more votes than the blob. Not too sure it’s a message issue.

Hillary just called and said she would trade 6 million of her votes for what Trump won: