Question for libs, dems and/or snowflakes...

[Owl'd You're Up!]

"fairly minor in substance, entirely inconsequential as an issue" and "fairly damaging as to Hillary's electoral prospects" seem to me to contradict each other.

Is that really so unclear?

A man couldn't get home in time, and so, believing no one is watching, he peed in some corner, is being filmed and watched by a giggling child. All hell breaks loose because he's accused of exposing himself, he loses job, wife, home, and kills himself.

You could say, what he's done was "fairly minor in substance, entirely inconsequential as an issue" and fairly damaging to the man's life.

Clearer now?

[Cancel 2018.1]

Call it what you want, fool. This was your concocted premise.

"If the emails from the DNC and Podesta exposed by Wikileaks had been proven to be sourced from say, a dem watchdog group...."

They weren't, were they?

Of course not. I made the query because the silence from dims was deafening when those emails were exposed. And then I hear from hrc on her excuses tour that was one of the 38 reasons she lost. I hear two differnt thigs: 1. the emails were harmless and 2. the emails harmed her.

I'll school you here, cretin.

"This fallacy consists of offering a poorly supported claim about what might have happened in the past or future if circumstances or conditions were other than they actually were or are.

I know that already. Problem is I made no claim. I asked questions.

The fallacy also involves treating hypothetical situations as if they were fact.

Again I made no claim. I asked a question. There's a big difference between making a claim and asking questions (which of course you won't answer, even the one without hypothetical situations. (Look up the definitions of hypothesis and hypothetical before answering please. I'm getting bored with your repeated ignorance.)

[PostmodernProphet]

Is that really so unclear?

A man couldn't get home in time, and so, believing no one is watching, he peed in some corner, is being filmed and watched by a giggling child. All hell breaks loose because he's accused of exposing himself, he loses job, wife, home, and kills himself.

You could say, what he's done was "fairly minor in substance, entirely inconsequential as an issue" and fairly damaging to the man's life.

Clearer now?

sounds quite consequential if he was arrested, lost his wife, etc.......be that as it may, conspiring to promote one candidate over another in a national election would be of greater consequence than one man peeing in a corner.........

[Cancel 2018.1]

Is that really so unclear?

A man couldn't get home in time, and so, believing no one is watching, he peed in some corner, is being filmed and watched by a giggling child. All hell breaks loose because he's accused of exposing himself, he loses job, wife, home, and kills himself.

You could say, what he's done was "fairly minor in substance, entirely inconsequential as an issue" and fairly damaging to the man's life.

Clearer now?

Yes, thanks. That did clarify your statement.
Another comparison was when Romney made that statement about 47% takers or something like that.
And repubs did an autopsy after the election. hrc went on an excuses tour. See the difference? Introspection vs. excuses.

[Cancel 2018.1]

sounds quite consequential if he was arrested, lost his wife, etc.......be that as it may, conspiring to promote one candidate over another in a national election would be of greater consequence than one man peeing in a corner.........

Thanks for joining the conversation prophet. You hit the nail on the head in what I bolded. The Romney 47% statement was nothing compared to what you just said and at least repubs did some introspection. Dims... violent protests against free speech, excuses tour, hollywierds calling for assassination or beheading, trannies assaulting police horses with knives. The behavior from the left has been like nothing I would have ever imagined.

[Owl'd You're Up!]

Yes, thanks. That did clarify your statement.
Another comparison was when Romney made that statement about 47% takers or something like that.
And repubs did an autopsy after the election. hrc went on an excuses tour. See the difference? Introspection vs. excuses.

Heavens, Romney let himself be seen as having contempt for close to half of Americans. As far as I have seen, he's never personally, publicly admitted to any fault that cost him the election.

Hillary took personal responsibility, but not in any specific way. And why should she? All she'd get in return is Rightardia collectively jumping on her for every single specific issue, "even she said so!!!"

Yeah, "introspection": There was this infamous "autopsy", most notably recommending reaching out to minorities. Any guesses as to what happened to it? Exactly, it went straight to the waste basket, all but forgotten, because the GOP knows perfectly well that without fishing in muddy waters, pandering to racists, White nationalists, and the alt-right, they'd never again win a national election, and that doesn't work all that well while reaching out to minorities. "Introspection" like that.

Again, were you born yesterday?

[domer76]

Of course not. I made the query because the silence from dims was deafening when those emails were exposed. And then I hear from hrc on her excuses tour that was one of the 38 reasons she lost. I hear two differnt thigs: 1. the emails were harmless and 2. the emails harmed her.
I know that already. Problem is I made no claim. I asked questions. Again I made no claim. I asked a question. There's a big difference between making a claim and asking questions (which of course you won't answer, even the one without hypothetical situations. (Look up the definitions of hypothesis and hypothetical before answering please. I'm getting bored with your repeated ignorance.)

Hypothesis Contrary to Fact.

Own it, twit.

[Cancel 2018.1]

Heavens, Romney let himself be seen as having contempt for close to half of Americans. As far as I have seen, he's never personally, publicly admitted to any fault that cost him the election.

Hillary took personal responsibility, but not in any specific way. And why should she? All she'd get in return is Rightardia collectively jumping on her for every single specific issue, "even she said so!!!"

Yeah, "introspection": There was this infamous "autopsy", most notably recommending reaching out to minorities. Any guesses as to what happened to it? Exactly, it went straight to the waste basket, all but forgotten, because the GOP knows perfectly well that without fishing in muddy waters, pandering to racists, White nationalists, and the alt-right, they'd never again win a national election, and that doesn't work all that well while reaching out to minorities. "Introspection" like that.

Again, were you born yesterday?

You answered the question, sort of. Be gone.

[Cancel 2018.1]

Hypothesis Contrary to Fact.

Own it, twit.

You didn't look up the definitions. Now you've turned the corner from ignorance to willful ignorance. Now I'm really bored with your repeated ignorance. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[evince]

I know. I never did understand why he was allowed to run as one.
I know. Look up 'crime' and corruption'. There's a difference.

how was anything corrupt fucktard

[evince]

If the emails from the DNC and Podesta exposed by Wikileaks had been proven to be sourced from say, a dem watchdog group looking to clean up the DNC's act or from Bernie bros, or say from G.B or Canada (our staunchest allies) would you behave differently or still put your heads in the sand? So far I've heard nothing from dems about doing anything to hold their leaders responsible for their blatant corruption not to speak of open racism.

Repubs, right leaners, independents, tea partiers, stormfronters, and libertarians please refrain from commenting for about a day. I really only want to see responses, if any , from the left.

I predict very few responses or 'yeah but Trump colluded blah blah', or I will be personally attacked. Almost guaranteed if TTQ responds she'll call me a racist for posting this.
BAC has already started a thread about the need for dem introspection , no real need for him to respond, but of course I welcome his comments.

neither of those were displayed in the emails asshole

[Cancel 2018.1]

how was anything corrupt fucktard

conspiring to promote one candidate over another in a national election

[evince]

ummmm


that is what partys do in a primary fucking idiot

[evince]

conspiring to promote one candidate over another in a national election

PRIMARY


asshole


its not run by the feds fucking idiot

[evince]

Imagine


the Democratic party perefered Hilary ( a life long Democratic voter)


over Bernie


A guy they gave a break to and allowed him to get some cred by using our party to run


gee how suprizing


he then used Russian lies instead of telling his people they were lies