Originally Posted by
LV426
You need a time out.
Clever comeback.
Hint: Don't relentlessly spam people with the same 4 moronic fallacies over and over and then act like they're being weird when they make a template for copying and pasting for the next fifty times you spam them with it.
Originally Posted by
LV426
So you're saying you and Trump convinced them to buy those doses
Never said anything like that. Learn how to read, imbecile.
SCIENCE convinced them to buy those doses. Anti-science Democrat scaremongering kept anyone from buying it, so it sat there.
Originally Posted by
LV426
but then Democrats (who have no power in Oklahoma) convinced Oklahoma to not use any of the doses they just bought?
And we're back to you saying obviously moronic things. People refusing to buy something means it does not get bought. You can comprehend THAT much, right?
Originally Posted by
LV426
Not what ad hominem is, you stupid bastard (<-THAT is ad hominem).
BOTH are, you ACTUALLY stupid bastard.
And I quote (from literally the very first thing that comes up on Google):
"Ad hominem is a logical fallacy that involves a personal attack: an argument based on the perceived failings of an adversary rather than on the merits of the case."
Nothing about that indicates that it has to be name-calling, dumb-ass. As usual, this is just you doing what you do best. Being provably wrong.
Next.
Originally Posted by
LV426
And your lack of action on 1/6 is wholly relevant to this debate because it speaks to your sincerity.
You say you sincerely believe the election was stolen, but you didn't do anything about it even though the magnitude of what you're alleging requires personal action on your part.
So you ran your big mouth, trying to convince other people to do the things you're too chickenshit to do yourself.
Pathological LV426 Lunacy #1
Problems with the moronic fallacy you are relentlessly spamming this site with about how only domestic terrorists can object to election theft:
-It is invalid logic. It is an ad hominem fallacy (trying to shift the debate to attacking the debater personally instead of attacking their argument) as well as a non-sequiter fallacy (the logic simply does not follow).
-You don't get to arbitrarily invent rules about how people are allowed to respond to a given problem and then psychotically harass them about it for 50 pages straight on a thread that has nothing to do with your absurd fallacy in the first place. Different people can have different solutions to the same problem. Not that it is any of your business how anyone chooses to respond to election theft.
-But even playing along with the obviously stupid and invalid "logic" that if you didn't attack the Capitol Building, then you cannot possibly disagree with the election being stolen, what about poor people, people who live far away, injured people, sick people, people who just had a death in the family, people who had jury duty or who were in jail? Can THEY not have attacked the Capitol Building and still have some random online idiot's permission to disagree?
-It is an idiotic attempt to taunt, goad, and troll anyone who disagrees with election theft. No one is ever going to think this ridiculous line of reasoning is compelling. It is completely ineffective and makes you look childish, obnoxious, and dense.
-By this garbage logic, every Democrat is a coward for peddling the most hysterical conspiracy theories about President Trump being a secret Russian agent and them not responding by invading the White House. Even addressing something so clearly ludicrous seems beneath anything to which any member of this site should ever be expected to subject themselves.
Bookmarks