Thanks for your concern. I can't address the barrage of replies that I expected would come, don't have the time or energy. As I said, I'm not here to argue, just expressing a point of view, agree or don't, it doesn't matter to me. I'm just showing that it exists and it's not a unique or rare position. It's not being duped or being conned. Believe it or not, independent thinkers can, on their own, assess the situation and draw conclusions. If think those people are stupid, that's your prerogative, same way it's my prerogative to find the those on the other side of the coin to be "low information."
I'm going to apologize for joining the pile on. You're entitled to your own opinions and to the extent that Clutch and the mods allow it express it on here. The title of this sub forum is "Debate and Discuss" and that means you should expect then that other will have opinions that may not agree with yours's and as you are posting it here will challenge you on those. Your claim is that those that don't agree with you are "low information" from what I've seen skimming the last page is that other posters have called upon you to provide evidence and have provided counters. Now to your credit you did provide some information in the term of a Washington Times article which others have challenged that too. Instead of engaging others on he substance of what they've challenged them you're going back o claiming that these people are stupid and "low information." You're free to have that opinion but if you're going to come and put forward a position and accuse others of being low information shouldn't you be providing more information to support your argument? It strikes me as your argument that others are "low information" is because they aren't following the same information as you are. That would be like me making the argument that the Moon is made of cheese and I can point to an article that makes that claim. If you haven't seen it or don't agree with it then you are low information.
I posit that the chances that he-who-will-not-be-named of responding meaningfully is a “statistical impossibility”.
He has bought into a lot of false reporting that have already been exposed as fake. I would love to see him acknowledge his error, or provide some actual evidence. So far he hasn't.
Everyone is entitled to their own decision and that's yours... Mines is this There's a difference between conservative republican and Trump republican and I have been stating that for a while... sounds to me as if you're trying to group them together... Trump is by far the worst President in my lifetime, I thought no one would ever be able to take the crown from George W. Bush, but I'll be damn if Trump didn't do it with flying colors and put a huge gap between him and any other competitors... T_Man
All depends.. If at least 1 senator wins in GA, Biden will have a shot to get things accomplished.... T_Man
surahops sure picked the worst possible day to praise trump... the day he vetoes the bill supporting our military, gums up a pandemic bill (in the process, throwing the senate majority leader and senate republics under the bus) and pardons another wave of vile criminals that surround his crime syndicate...
No one is taking away any ability to form an opinion or to express that opinion, no matter how wrong or uninformed. But in the same way, folks have the same ability to challenge and criticize that opinion.
So remember that @SuraGotMadHops seemed bothered by Twitter and Facebook removing or labeling stories that are inaccurate and then posts a story that has been debunked and ended up being completely unmerited. I applaud that he found an article to back his beliefs. But the point is that he bought into an article that had no merit and was a inaccurate. That's the problem we face. Some folks buy into things that just aren't true and then try and accuse others of being low information.
I think they can sway a couple of Republicans their way if they come to the table WILLING to listen and negotiate... T_Man
Reminds me of the guy who disappeared from here awhile back. Mr. Blame Cuomo for everything our President failed to do. Die hard Trumpers just resort to Trump like responses. It's embedded in their brain.
The "statistical impossibility" is one of the more bizarre arguments among already far fetched arguments put forward. It basically goes that it would be statistically impossible for Biden to win in states that Hillary Clinton had lost 4 years ago. In other words the electorate doesn't change and states voted the same way that they did in 2016.
Most sources that claim a voter fraud matter is debunked or unmeritorious come from left sources. So no, I'm not going to dismiss a testimony or evidence just because somebody says to. If you want to argue then why are courts throwing these cases out, again, the primary defect is standing vs evidence.
So you're saying you view things through the lens of political bias while everyone else should accept what you put forward without considering bias..
