Iran Framework Agreed

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
😆 Wow! You are so indoctrinated. They are bot the same.

"No, realistic. I don't believe the lie that Democrats are good. I could see them starting a war if they could blame it on the Republicans. After all, the Republicans are the true enemy, and they don't really care about the common people who will get hurt."

Your very terrible writing in this post led to Robtard's confusion. As a very terrible writer, you shouldn't balk when people ask you to elaborate on what you have very terribly written.

I suspect your assertion that the Republicans are the "true enemy" was sarcastically meant to illustrate your perception of the Democratic mindset, but the following claim that "they don't really care about the common people" puts that interpretation into question. Given your wording, it would seem you are saying the Republicans don't care about the common people. However, this doesn't fit the context of your post, since your position is that both sides are equally wrong. Your poor sentence structure makes that last sentence seem like a non-sequitur, where you are randomly stating that Republicans are the definition of evil.

Let me go ahead and fix your post to make it more legible:

No, I've just been realistic. I don't believe the lie that Democrats are good. I could see them starting a war if they could blame it on the Republicans. After all, "the Republicans are the true enemy", and the Democrats don't really care about the common people who will get hurt by their actions.

There, with just a few minor alterations your post has been improved. You are welcome. 👆

Originally posted by NemeBro
Your very terrible writing in this post led to Robtard's confusion. As a very terrible writer, you shouldn't balk when people ask you to elaborate on what you have very terribly written.

Originally posted by NemeBro
I suspect your assertion that the Republicans are the "true enemy" was sarcastically meant to illustrate your perception of the Democratic mindset, but the following claim that "they don't really care about the common people" puts that interpretation into question. Given your wording, it would seem you are saying the Republicans don't care about the common people. However, this doesn't fit the context of your post, since your position is that both sides are equally wrong. Your poor sentence structure makes that last sentence seem like a non-sequitur, where you are randomly stating that Republicans are the definition of evil.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Let me go ahead and fix your post to make it more legible:
No, I've just been realistic. I don't believe the lie that Democrats are good. I could see them starting a war if they could blame it on the Republicans. After all, "the Republicans are the true enemy", and the Democrats don't really care about the common people who will get hurt by their actions.

Originally posted by NemeBro
There, with just a few minor alterations your post has been improved. You are welcome. 👆

Why can't I quote your post?

No do me🙂

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is not what I was saying. I was saying that the Democrats would start a war if they could blame the Republicans.

Oh.

.... maybe? But even from a ruthless point of view, that's a risky gambit, and wars cost money and one of the Democrat's big winning points is their economic success in comparison, so they wouldn't want to undermine that with war costs...

Even a completely realpolitik, ruthless-advantage view of each side can have significant differences between the sides.

So which party is evil? I was never talking about policies.

Evil is something people have different positions on, so I'll skip that word.

One party does policies that my observations indicate as significantly more effective in areas such as lowering unemployment, raising economic growth, managing debt, and providing for the health of it's constituents.

LOL!

Irony for you: The day after you made this post, a 5-4 vote for marriage equality was passed. Millions of Americans can get married now when they used to not be able to.

Had a different president been elected in place of the current one, there'd be a more conservative justice in place of one of those. It'd be 5-4 against, at best.

A difference was made.

How is that kool aid?

I ask the same to you.

If two groups do visibly different policy with recordably different results, then where is the equal-ness you insist upon coming from?

So, what is better, getting screwed by a Democrat or a Republican?

Well, one is doing policy that screws me over significantly less. So, that one.

Do you have a reason to think they're the same besides assuming they are?

Would the Republicans have passed health care and marriage equality? Would they have passed the same size of stimulus, estimated in saving 2-4 million jobs?

Would they have acted the same?

If you do think they'd have acted the same, explain your reasoning, don't just toss out buzz-words like 'indoctrination' and 'kool-aid'.

Empty assumption of equalness of results is not the same as evidence of equalness of results. Cynicism is not wisdom, it is merely cynicism, and that assumes to be all your view is based on. That, and the fallacy that things automatically follow the in-between answer.

I’m a Buddhist, I always take the middle way.

Exactly, it's a golden mean fallacy. You will assume the middle even when it's not true.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, that was not what he was trying to do. I know Robtard very well, and I saw through his fake confusion. But apparently you didn’t.

To add context as to why I was confused: I know you as the guy who routinely says "Dems and Reps are equally bad", but then spends a considerable amount of time shitting on Democrats. Hence the confusion of you seemingly flipping and saying "both are bad, but Republicans are worse", which would be the opposite of how I know you. ie my "scummier" question.

Originally posted by Q99
...Exactly, it's a golden mean fallacy. You will assume the middle even when it's not true.

Obviously you have no idea what the middle way is, otherwise you would have gotten the joke.

Talking to you is a waist of my time.

Originally posted by Robtard
For the record, my question wasn't based on "false confusion", your odd sentence structure actually confused me and why I asked for clarification. Nemebro was spot on.

To add context why I was confused, I know you as the guy who routinely says "both Dems and Reps are equally bad", but then spends a considerable amount of time shitting on Democrats. Hence the confusion of you seemingly flipping and saying "both are bad, but Republicans are worse", which would be the opposite of how I know you. ie my "scummier" question.

Incorrect. You are seeing from your own bias. If I said anything negative about the Republicans everyone on this forum would agree with me, and no one would get the point. Instead I tell everyone that the Democrats are evil because it goes against their indoctrination, and they take notice (just like you did).

I have gotten into some conversations with conservatives on this forum where I point out their indoctrination, but it mostly happens in the religious forum.

The absents of something is not proof of something.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Incorrect. You are seeing from your own bias. If I said anything negative about the Republicans everyone on this forum would agree with me, and no one would get the point. Instead I tell everyone that the Democrats are evil because it goes against their indoctrination, and they take notice (just like you did).

I have gotten into some conversations with conservatives on this forum where I point out their indoctrination, but it mostly happens in the religious forum.

The absents of something is not proof of something.

Originally posted by Q99
Oh.

.... maybe? But even from a ruthless point of view, that's a risky gambit, and wars cost money and one of the Democrat's big winning points is their economic success in comparison, so they wouldn't want to undermine that with war costs...

Even a completely realpolitik, ruthless-advantage view of each side can have significant differences between the sides.

Evil is something people have different positions on, so I'll skip that word.

One party does policies that my observations indicate as significantly more effective in areas such as lowering unemployment, raising economic growth, managing debt, and providing for the health of it's constituents.

Irony for you: The day after you made this post, a 5-4 vote for marriage equality was passed. Millions of Americans can get married now when they used to not be able to.

Had a different president been elected in place of the current one, there'd be a more conservative justice in place of one of those. It'd be 5-4 against, at best.

A difference was made.

I ask the same to you.

If two groups do visibly different policy with recordably different results, then where is the equal-ness you insist upon coming from?

Well, one is doing policy that screws me over significantly less. So, that one.

Do you have a reason to think they're the same besides assuming they are?

Would the Republicans have passed health care and marriage equality? Would they have passed the same size of stimulus, estimated in saving 2-4 million jobs?

Would they have acted the same?

If you do think they'd have acted the same, explain your reasoning, don't just toss out buzz-words like 'indoctrination' and 'kool-aid'.

Empty assumption of equalness of results is not the same as evidence of equalness of results. Cynicism is not wisdom, it is merely cynicism, and that assumes to be all your view is based on. That, and the fallacy that things automatically follow the in-between answer.

Exactly, it's a golden mean fallacy. You will assume the middle even when it's not true.

So much BS in here where does one start. Talking about the gay marriage ruling in the Iran thread, priceless.

Originally posted by Robtard
What I said can't be argued against as it's how I read your statement and why it confused me.

I thought we were past that. I wasn't talking about your confusion. I was talking about the point. Okay, you were confused, I'm sorry, now get over it.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Talking to you is a waist of my time.

No one begged to ask why Q99 went off on a gay marriage tirade in the Iran framework thread? Interesting..

Originally posted by Tzeentch
As is elementary-level spelling skills, apparently.

Grammar Nazi!