Should Hilary Run In The Next Election (The Unbiased Version)

[Angrboda]

2. I was talking about the Democrats in and out of this forum. I don't know why you think I'd vote based on this forum discussion alone. I didn't say that.

3. Genetic fallacy?

4. Well, I'm talking about Democrats, and was called a moron by one at the beginning of this thread, so why is anything else relevant? That's what I was responding to, and what I am still talking about. I know you didn't call them assholes. You came in and started apparently talking about something else entirely.


Maybe that particular articles isn't wrong, but I don't trust the source, and I don't particularly think op-eds are good sources for debates.

Let's leave it at, yes I realize that people not voting for Hillary meant she lost the election. If that's all you have to say, you've said it.

Indeed i think the conversation has run it's coarse

And since you were asking  

The Genetic fallacy is the fallacy judging something from it's origins rather then it's content .

I think it would be more accurate to say her argument was an ad hominem argument rather than an example of the genetic fallacy, but so long as we all know what was meant, I'm not sure it matters.

---

They're a very biased news source, so much that, while they are 'factual' in their reporting, they use language and cherry-picking to skew news. Don't get me wrong, I'm more liberal than not, but I prefer unbiased reporting, especially when we're talking about Democrats passing the buck to Bernie supporters being discussed by a heavily-liberal, cherry-picking news site.

Meh. Sounds a lot like "I don't like Huffpost because I don't like Huffpost." Regardless, if your beef was with the way they presented specific information rather than the actual information itself, it seems you could have made a more cogent point. Your complaining about the link simply because it was Huffpost seems like a lazy argument.