• OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Your strategy is for people to get fed up with the status quo (Dems) and unseat them for good.

    Liar. Where did I claim this?

    What I’ve said, that you’re deliberately mischaraterizing, is that people will inevitably get fed up with the status quo (Dems) and turn to fascism, unless something is done to stop it, either the Dems enacting the necessary policies or people moving to a new party, which are what I advocate for. In other words, the exact opposite of what you’re characterizing my position as.

    Is this all you have? You can’t actually find fault with my reasoning, so finding yourself backed into a corner you just try to lie and slander your way out of it?

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Like I said

          I’m not gonna nuh-uh-yuh-huh with someone who doesn’t understand elections

          I made my point, it remains valid. You’re throwing water on a grease fire because it’s obvious to you that water puts out fire.

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            The only reason you’re talking about “nuh-uh-yuh-huh” is because you can’t make a coherent argument beyond that.

            Your “point” is grounded in deliberate lies and mischaracterization.

            Me: If I see something that’s going to start a house fire, I should try to stop it or put it out, or, failing that, plan around the house fire occuring.

            You: Your strategy is for the house to burn down.

            In what way is that not a blatant and deliberate lie?