2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Luke Savage on the SOTU speech:

Whatever its grotesqueries, it’s a message that cannot and will not be defeated by the rhetoric and policies inexplicably still in vogue among centrist liberals. As 2016 demonstrated, technocratic liberalism married with vague uplift and an empty rhetoric of inclusion is woefully vulnerable to Trump’s brand of noxious populism. Tonight’s State of the Union is a dire warning about what may lie ahead if Trump’s reelection campaign is gifted with yet another establishment Democrat as an adversary in November.
Click to expand...

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/02/trump-state-of-the-union
 
Belz... said:
Cabbage, stop and read: you added another claim, which I agreed with, but never made clear that is superceded the earlier one. Was it too much to say "ok, you're right, I should've said X"?
Click to expand...


Actually, no, you still disagreed with it:

Belz... said:
Even allowing for that, he still never said or implied what you claimed. You're drawing an inference that one leads to the other, but your accusation has not been substantiated. If you had said that dudalb's argument is effectively equivalent to this, I would not have challenged. But you said that he has said this, when he has not.
Click to expand...



...which is why you perpetuated this nonsense.
 
Can we all at least agree the the Dems getting behind a candidate sooner rather then later is in everyone's best interest?
 
Belz... said:
No, I didn't. I specifically said right there in the quote that I allowed for it, and then went on to say that your original claim, which you had not retracted at the time, was still wrong.

For ****'s sake, how about you take a breather and read properly before posting again? And didn't you say you were no longer participating in this discussion, as you do every time you have a debate with someone? How about you keep your word once in a while.

I can't believe you found a way to continue to disagree after we've agreed. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...



LOL.

K
 
JoeMorgue said:
Can we all at least agree the the Dems getting behind a candidate sooner rather then later is in everyone's best interest?
Click to expand...

At best, they'll agree that the Dems should get behind their candidate sooner rather than later.
 
Belz... said:
Yeah sorry about that middle paragraph. That was a little harsh.
Click to expand...


Saying I was done with the debate was more of a hint that we should both simply drop it. On the other hand, I don't really like you presenting your side without my own rebuttal, so I persisted.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Can we all at least agree the the Dems getting behind a candidate sooner rather then later is in everyone's best interest?
Click to expand...
Yes, it will be.

Hopefully the large number of Candidates in the field will (ironically) lead to a simpler/shorter primary season, as individual candidates will find it hard to pick up delegates in such a diverse field.

Compare that to the 2016 Democratic primary, where the field was limited to 2 "main" challengers, which allowed the 2 of them to beat up on each other for a much longer time before the final winner emerged.
 
Cabbage said:
Saying I was done with the debate was more of a hint that we should both simply drop it. On the other hand, I don't really like you presenting your side without my own rebuttal, so I persisted.
Click to expand...

I can understand that. It's one of the reasons why I pretty much am never the one to stop a debate, short of an agreement.
 
Belz... said:
I can understand that. It's one of the reasons why I pretty much am never the one to stop a debate, short of an agreement.
Click to expand...


Great! My apologies for anything harsh I might have said the last couple of days.
 
Mike! said:
One of the reasons I always thought 'Arguememnon' was a good fit for you when you briefly switched to it.
Click to expand...

Yeah but as I said it was too distracting. People were using the name as a handwave of my arguments and points. "Oh, your name means you just want to argue" and so on. Apparently no one knows what "argument" means anymore.
 
Belz... said:
Yeah but as I said it was too distracting. People were using the name as a handwave of my arguments and points. "Oh, your name means you just want to argue" and so on. Apparently no one knows what "argument" means anymore.
Click to expand...

I think people were making an association between your handle and your behavior. The handle changed, but the behavior didn't. And lately it's been the behavior that's a distraction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom