“That’s some nice ‘evidence’ you’ve got there. Unfortunately, the person talking about it doesn’t agree with me politically so that means it’s not real.”
Personally, I think you should probably vote for El-Sayed, because I’m not that person and don’t agree with all of her positions on everything. See, and I know this is a difficult concept to grasp, sometimes, a person is right about something, even if I disagree with them about something else. Kind of like Free Beacon, actually!
I’m just chiming in to point out how utterly ridiculous you’re being by writing off evidence just because the source presenting the evidence is biased.
“Get out of the road! There’s a car coming!”
“Who did you vote for? Who do you say I should vote for?”
“Turn around! Look, you can see it with your own eyes!”
“So, you’re too cowardly to answer my questions.”
“Dude, she’s right, there’s a car right there!”
“You must be her alt then. Who do you say I should vote for?”
No I’m admitting most people are too ignorant to engage with politics intellectually and it’s the job of those who will to simplify the positions for them.
If the other side is going to stand lock step against us; our divisions will be exploited.
You win an election or you lose it. Intellectual honesty doesn’t get a vote multiplier.
The facts remain the facts no matter how they are twisted.
Lol, very rich of you to say that.
The fact is the claim about El-Sayed being a Dubai landlord is objectively true. It remains a fact, even if you try to twist it by claiming that anyone who acknowledges it is “aligning with fools and charlatans.”
Either way vote El-Sayed is the end of your point and that’s fine with me.
It absolutely is not. Whether you vote for him or not is trivial, whether you are honest or not is much more important. The end of my point is that you’re a liar and a hack, and that you’re not even good at being a lying hack.
Well don’t worry in the upcoming election of truth versus lies I’ll very much be on your side.
But in this specific election. The real one that actually exists, you’re serving Mike Rodgers. So feel free to list his myriad financial entanglements in the pursuit of truthfulness and fairness that you’re so obviously committed to.
“That’s some nice ‘evidence’ you’ve got there. Unfortunately, the person talking about it doesn’t agree with me politically so that means it’s not real.”
It’s electorialism actually. El-Sayed may not be perfect. But look who you’re allying with to criticize him.
Maybe you will answer the question they were obviously too cowardly/ignorant/your alt to answer.
Who should I write in?
Lmao “my alt?”
Personally, I think you should probably vote for El-Sayed, because I’m not that person and don’t agree with all of her positions on everything. See, and I know this is a difficult concept to grasp, sometimes, a person is right about something, even if I disagree with them about something else. Kind of like Free Beacon, actually!
I’m just chiming in to point out how utterly ridiculous you’re being by writing off evidence just because the source presenting the evidence is biased.
“Get out of the road! There’s a car coming!”
“Who did you vote for? Who do you say I should vote for?”
“Turn around! Look, you can see it with your own eyes!”
“So, you’re too cowardly to answer my questions.”
“Dude, she’s right, there’s a car right there!”
“You must be her alt then. Who do you say I should vote for?”
Oh so you’re just criticizing the cantidate you hope wins?
Maybe pull over and let someone else drive.
Yes? That’s called being intellectually honest and not a partisan hack.
Are you openly admitting that you won’t acknowledge criticism of people you support, even if that criticism is backed by hard evidence?
No I’m admitting most people are too ignorant to engage with politics intellectually and it’s the job of those who will to simplify the positions for them.
If the other side is going to stand lock step against us; our divisions will be exploited.
You win an election or you lose it. Intellectual honesty doesn’t get a vote multiplier.
So you’re a partisan hack and a liar, understood.
And a bad liar, at that. If you’re gonna lie, don’t do so in a way that you can get caught out and exposed so easily lmao.
I’m an objectivist.
If you want to align yourself with fools and charlitains to pretend you have some moral high ground be my guest.
The facts remain the facts no matter how they are twisted.
Either way vote El-Sayed is the end of your point and that’s fine with me.
Lol, very rich of you to say that.
The fact is the claim about El-Sayed being a Dubai landlord is objectively true. It remains a fact, even if you try to twist it by claiming that anyone who acknowledges it is “aligning with fools and charlatans.”
It absolutely is not. Whether you vote for him or not is trivial, whether you are honest or not is much more important. The end of my point is that you’re a liar and a hack, and that you’re not even good at being a lying hack.
Well don’t worry in the upcoming election of truth versus lies I’ll very much be on your side.
But in this specific election. The real one that actually exists, you’re serving Mike Rodgers. So feel free to list his myriad financial entanglements in the pursuit of truthfulness and fairness that you’re so obviously committed to.