The Next Supreme Court Justice

Originally posted by Robtard
Your sentence was gibberish. So you're making a faulty comparison for your special win.

It's called an exaggerated example. glad I could educate you further.

You're welcome.

Originally posted by BackFire
Fun fact I just learned. Do you guys know why there are 9 Supreme Court justices? They picked that number because at the time there were 9 judicial circuits. There are now 12. Do if the dems do expand the court they could aim for 12 seats saying that they’re staying true to the vision of the founders when they decided on 9 seats.

At least that’s a better argument to the public than “the republicans made us do this terrible thing you all hate. Blame them”.

I mean, if they had a time machine and could go back before they ever tried to blame republicans for why they wanna pack the court this would be a great reason to put forth.

It's a shame they didn't have you advising them. Now they're just stuck with "but republicans" and crying about norms being shattered while they...seek to shatter norms lol.

Originally posted by Robtard
Your sentence was gibberish. So you're making a faulty comparison for your special win.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yep and while we are noting how I feel, I feel I have to point out if the Republicans wanted to do something shady(but not against the rules) and were using something democrats did centuries ago to justify it you'd react the same way.

Correct. I'd feel the same because I am consistent. Any other feelings you'd like to get off your chest?

Originally posted by Silent Master
It's called an exaggerated example. glad I could educate you further.

You're welcome.

Originally posted by Robtard
Correct. I'd feel the same because I am consistent. Any other feelings you'd like to get off your chest?

Yes, if what I was doing was a distraction attempt it worked 👆

Originally posted by Silent Master
It's called an exaggerated example. glad I could educate you further.

You're welcome.

You made a faulty comparison to try and get a win and it was called out. Sorry that happened to you, but you did it to yourself.

Originally posted by Robtard
Your sentence was gibberish. So you're making a faulty comparison for your special win.

"Men have uteruses" is even worse though.

ITT: Leftists upset Trump got 3 Supreme court picks.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes, if what I was doing was a distraction attempt it worked 👆

Please don't push your own shortcomings onto me, surt.

Originally posted by Surtur
"Men have uteruses" is even worse though.

No, you're also wrong. That sentence while incorrect, is not gibberish, you understand what the person is saying. Care to try again?

Originally posted by Silent Master
It's called an exaggerated example. glad I could educate you further.

You're welcome.

Originally posted by Newjak
And that also borders on a fallacy 😉

Kind of like making up new definitions for words?

Originally posted by Robtard
Please don't push your own shortcomings onto me, surt.

However you need to spin it. I wasn't trying to distract, but if I was you fell for it. Instead of just going "yeah we should use a different term" you doubled down for several pages before ultimately achieving nothing.

Originally posted by Surtur
I mean, if they had a time machine and could go back before they ever tried to blame republicans for why they wanna pack the court this would be a great reason to put forth.

It's a shame they didn't have you advising them. Now they're just stuck with "but republicans" and crying about norms being shattered while they...seek to shatter norms lol.

Dems have always been terrible at messaging and branding, honestly.

Originally posted by Robtard
No, you're also wrong. That sentence while incorrect, is not gibberish, you understand what the person is saying. Care to try again?

I understand the words, but it makes about as much sense as gibberish. I understood all the words SM used, just when you put them together they do not make sense.

Same goes with "men have uteruses". I know what all those words mean, but when you put them together we enter a magical realm of crazy

Originally posted by Silent Master
Kind of like making up new definitions for words?

Originally posted by BackFire
Dems have always been terrible at messaging and branding, honestly.

I still remember the DCCC putting out stickers for 2018 that legit said "I mean, have you seen the other guys?"

https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/882673142027702272

"She persisted, we resisted" ohohoho! Did you see what they did there? Clever.

Originally posted by Surtur
However you need to spin it. I wasn't trying to distract, but if I was you fell for it. Instead of just going "yeah we should use a different term" you doubled down for several pages before ultimately achieving nothing.

So if you understood and wasn't trying to distract you basically just admitted you knew what the attention was and just got hung up on the fact we weren't using the terminology you wanted in this instance?

Which means you're either a terrible grammar nazi or just trying to distract.

Originally posted by Newjak
Not really in the same vein. Actually what you did by pretending that we're making up new definitions disregarding terminology that means no words have meaning. It's kind of silly.

You are making up new definitions though, no pretending required.