"Insult a non-voter" He claims to not be from the U.S. so what risk is there? Who are we losing?
One side in this country is embracing full on fascism and they arent even trying to hide it anymore. If someone is either low-information or ignorant enough to not see that, then insulting them and telling them factual information is valid. Biden is the only option this election.
If someone insults you for not having a strong opinion regarding nazis and then you think Wow theyre mean I HAVE to vote for the nazis now then youre beyond help.
the question we already know you won't answer
Any one of these on their own? Sure. But let's be reasonable and realistic here.
Because it's not relevant. On the day CE closed this was the only account I was using.Hey everyone, the sus low karma alt isn't fessing to who their main is because it's "not relevant".
uses the conservative lingo of calling the left "A cult."
Wasn't aggressive I even actively gave him the benefit of doubt and ultimately I was right.
I'm more patient with real people and I'm actively known for my patience but I'm not so patient with sock puppets. Which he undoubtedly is. As I outlined in post 250.
What gave it away for me was his insistence people vote third party and getting really annoyed that people took issue with that answer.
I do see people on the left call people who support Trump 'cultists' too so this one inherently doesn't set me off thinking someone is one way or the other. However the rest of your post seems pretty on point. =P
and the most obvious and reasonable answer is usually correct.Good'ole Occam's Razor
it's rare for someone on the left to consider others on the left of being a cult
To be fair Hillary supporters did it to Bernie supporters all the time.Bernie bros were an actual thing and still exist though
After years of being called a "Bernie Bro" just because I preferred him over Hillary based on their voting records and the fact that Bernie polled better against the Republicans I've kinda lost patience for hostile Democrats.
Sure but I'd bet you'd respond differently.
Bernie bros were an actual thing and still exist though
I havent seen supporters of any democrat but Bernie create such intricate theories about how Bernie would win against all odds or insisting that he shouldve been the nominee. People still do this shit in 2024.
Nobody does that for Biden. He just demonstrably does not have a cult.
Eh, I'm not on a low karma account for my upstanding citizenry. I can only commit to civility on this subject because I'm a third-party to the original discussion. >_>Ive never seen a single person argue that Biden shouldve been the 2016 nominee. Nobody actually likes Biden because hes Biden despite him being an above average president overall. I dont know where these people are that are claiming that Biden is some super candidate but i sure as hell have not seen them.
But if you mean that I wouldn't respond with generic alt-right NPC esque responses then yeah that's true.
Biden supporters constantly claimed he was the only candidate who could beat Trump (even though the polling said multiple candidates could), would've beat Hillary in the 2016 primary if he ran (even though he explictly said he couldn't, polling also said he couldn't, and the whole way he won the 2020 primary would've been nigh impossible to pull off against Hillary), is comfortably beating Trump right now even though poll after poll shows him losing in the swing states that historically decide elections, that people are Trumpers if they call out any eccentricities of Biden's speech/conduct, and so on and so forth.
It's just hard to see because you haven't been arguing with them.
And what other candidate shouldve replaced Biden for this election? Its factual that no other candidate has a better chance than Biden right now.Biden himself has stated that there are a few others that could defeat Trump as well. They know what's at stake though and will just wait for the next election to contend for the party nomination, also noting that switching when a 2nd term was possible for Biden only makes the party look weaker. I think that's part of why the GOP kept prodding Gavin Newsom about running for President (to create more division).
Biden himself has stated that there are a few others that could defeat Trump as well. They know what's at stake though and will just wait for the next election to contend for the party nomination, also noting that switching when a 2nd term was possible for Biden only makes the party look weaker. I think that's part of why the GOP kept prodding Gavin Newsom about running for President (to create more division).realistically who else would have a better chance than Biden right now though
realistically who else would have a better chance than Biden right now though
My bet is Whitmer will be a contender for the nomination. Pritzker is also a contender. No one else really has a legitimate shot.
My bet is Whitmer will be a contender for the nomination. Pritzker is also a contender. No one else really has a legitimate shot.nah youre good. I dont disagree with Whitmer for 2028.
EDIT: whoops, I thought you meant for 2028. My bad.
Ive never seen a single person argue that Biden shouldve been the 2016 nominee. Nobody actually likes Biden because hes Biden despite him being an above average president overall. I dont know where these people are that are claiming that Biden is some super candidate but i sure as hell have not seen them.
And what other candidate shouldve replaced Biden for this election? Its factual that no other candidate has a better chance than Biden right now.
Some people really underestimate the potential Newsom pick. He may not be my ideal choice but he can debate and easily defend himself. He's also very good at putting republican politicans in a corner leaving them stammering about what to say or do. His strongest debate tactic is putting them in a position where no matter what they say they are shooting themselves in the foot. I respect that. Lol
I'd be content with Newsom 2028 but I can't deny that since politics ebbs and flows we're likely to get a Republican after Biden leaves.
I dunno, I feel like Newsom could sell himself well. He's especially got the fire of wanting to take on right-wing propaganda and those who propagate it, which a lot of people sorely wish to see more of the Dem party do, instead of just standing by and letting them yap their shit unchallenged because that's "the high/adult road".
He's also good-looking, or so I hear, and comes from the state of CA, known as being one of the more progressive states in the Union.
He definitely has his issues though and I think there's other candidates with less baggage, just saying, I feel like the Dem party apparatus may try to make him the next big thing. On an anecdotal level, listening to progressive radio programming he's the name I've heard dropped most when asked for alternatives to Biden.
Let me rephrase: I meant that other than Newsom there are only two contenders: Whitmer and Pritzker. Newsom is very much the favorite at this point.I've said for like 2 years now that a Whitmer/Newsom ticket with either being P or VP would be a money ticket.
What's his record? You can't claim that California is the most liberal state and a monument of how America should look, then trash the governor.
That's cool and all, but do you think Joe Biden fairly won the 2020 election?
no
LOL at this topic. I had a hair trigger vs. one right wing clown who proceeded to prove my guess right in dozens of follow up posts, and than a defender of that first clown shows up whining about "aggressive hostility etc." and mostly keeps his mask on here, only to display a remarkable knowledge of GOP Clinton email talking points in a different topic.
All these right wingers do is play games, and they are so damn bad at it.
Sure wasn't me who said that, but yeah Newsom has made some good decisions, considering it's hard to fail when you have a Democratic supermajority. Yet he's quite often overriden that majority to make needlessly bad ones (presumably to protect his image for future national elections). This is a list of good Democratic legislation Newsom vetoed because sometimes progress has to take a backseat to ambition:
https://www.kqed.org/news/11963514/labor-rights-ice-and-self-driving-trucks-the-biggest-bills-vetoed-by-newsom-so-far
Bills for insulin caps, protection for trans kids, opposition to caste discrimination, leverage for workers on strike, etc. vetoed by Newsom and that's not even all the examples. And then his close ties to various corporations adds even more of a question mark to his intentions. People are tired of politicians who put their careers and donors ahead of the people and while Newsom is one of least problematic examples of one that's probably just because you have to be some level of decently liberal to be governor of California.
By contrast in the 2019 primary Harris never presented herself as any roadblock to progress, she generally embraced as much progressivism as a mainstream Democrat was allowed to, and that's why she had barely any conflict with Bernie compared to the other major candidates. She can legitimately probably hit him from the left, which is not good for him when she's also gonna be competitive for establishment support and he previously boxed himself in by saying he'd never run against her.
no
Sure must suck to live in a cult bubble.
noWhy?
noAppreciate you making it easy to not take you seriously
That's cool and all, but do you think Joe Biden fairly won the 2020 election?
no
@Mad_Cow46 is a Trumper chud who believes the fake voter fraud nonsense?Correct, but he won't admit to 90% of what he believes for fear of getting moderated.