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

[Amarok]

1. Swings are the vote you're wooing. I'm a swing. I'm arguing it's not our faults that Trump won. You just made my point in a different way. Thanks.

2. I didn't say I'd vote for Republicans because of our discussion. I already explained that.

3. Yes, pointing out that your sources are bad is 100% an argument.

4. Well, I'm saying voting for X didn't lead to the election of Y. Saying it did is blame. There's plenty of blame to go around, and it lands with both parties. Those of us on the sidelines are sick of their bullshit.

1. And i'm pointing out  i'm not convinced it would be enough nor would they have  stuck with Bernie winning him the election 

2. You said if we keep X up you would vote Republican .I was saying it would be silly to do so rather then do as you have done .

3.But not saying why they are bad is not an argument .I could have easily done that for your link but i didn't 

4. And i'm saying not voting for X contributed to the election of Y .And no that's not blame blame would be assign moral fault to the act . It was neither immoral nor wrong to not have voted for X even if it contributed to Y winning . And i never said people who didn't vote for X were the only contributor to Y winning . Many other factors contributed to Y winning just that it was one .

[Shell B]

1. Well, speaking as one, most of us who didn't vote Hillary voted third-party to avoid voting for either shill. You can doubt it, but you, like me, are using conjecture. The difference is, I'm not blaming anyone based on conjecture.

2. Yes. I don't think it's silly to vote for a different party if its base continues to alienate me and treat me like I handed Trump an election. What's silly about that? You don't like Republicans, so you wouldn't vote Republican. I generally like Democrats, but am definitely sliding away from being a fan. Do the math.

3. Firstly, I gave you a good link. A good source. Secondly, if you don't know why HuffPost is a bad source without me telling you, maybe you shouldn't get involved in these debates.

4. You don't have to think someone was being immoral to blame them. Democrats are blaming anyone but themselves for the loss of this election, and it doesn't look good on them.

Let's reiterate this conversation. This conversation didn't go, "Well, some people didn't vote for Hillary, so that's a contributing factor in why she wasn't elected." It went something along the lines of, "Bernie Bros are assholes who lost the election for Hillary." You didn't come into some innocuous intellectual conversation, so don't be surprised when I'm not all, "Yo, you're right. Thanks for pointing out the seriously obvious fucking fact that people not voting for someone means they got less votes. That's clearly what they meant when they were blaming people like me." If you're not blaming people for not voting for Hillary, you're simply saying that people not voting for her is why she lost the election, which doesn't need saying at all.

[Angrboda]

3. Firstly, I gave you a good link. A good source. Secondly, if you don't know why HuffPost is a bad source without me telling you, maybe you shouldn't get involved in these debates.

I'd like to hear your reasons for considering Huffpost a bad source. I know you've said as much a few times, but I don't know your reasons. I've never heard them being singled out particularly one way or the other.

[Shell B]

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.

[Minimalist]

They aren't as bad as Breitbart and Fox, though.

[Shell B]

They aren't as bad as Breitbart and Fox, though.

Well, yeah. Outright lying is their currency.

[Amarok]

1. Well, speaking as one, most of us who didn't vote Hillary voted third-party to avoid voting for either shill. You can doubt it, but you, like me, are using conjecture. The difference is, I'm not blaming anyone based on conjecture.

2. Yes. I don't think it's silly to vote for a different party if its base continues to alienate me and treat me like I handed Trump an election. What's silly about that? You don't like Republicans, so you wouldn't vote Republican. I generally like Democrats, but am definitely sliding away from being a fan. Do the math.

3. Firstly, I gave you a good link. A good source. Secondly, if you don't know why HuffPost is a bad source without me telling you, maybe you shouldn't get involved in these debates.

4. You don't have to think someone was being immoral to blame them. Democrats are blaming anyone but themselves for the loss of this election, and it doesn't look good on them.

Let's reiterate this conversation. This conversation didn't go, "Well, some people didn't vote for Hillary, so that's a contributing factor in why she wasn't elected." It went something along the lines of, "Bernie Bros are assholes who lost the election for Hillary." You didn't come into some innocuous intellectual conversation, so don't be surprised when I'm not all, "Yo, you're right. Thanks for pointing out the seriously obvious fucking fact that people not voting for someone means they got less votes. That's clearly what they meant when they were blaming people like me." If you're not blaming people for not voting for Hillary, you're simply saying that people not voting for her is why she lost the election, which doesn't need saying at all.

1. Yup  it's conjecture and again i'm not blaming you or third party voters .I'm simply skeptical if they would have stuck with Bernie .

2.Not the Democrats  this forum conversation as i have already said 

3. You didn't give a good reason why the link was bad you essentially performed a genetic fallacy 

4.I didn't say democrats i was referring to me .And i'm not a democrat .And i'm not blaming you .

Indeed let's reiterate this conversation .Nope at no point did i call Bernie supporters assholes nor did i blame them for losing the election for Hilary. All i said was not voting (which is fine ) indirectly contributed to Trumps victory. I don't care what anyone else meant it's what i meant . As for needing to be said just because does not need to be said does not make it less true .

---

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.

Which still does not demonstrate the particular article is wrong .And i got nothing in the article about blaming Bernie.

[Minimalist]

Today's Dilbert

[Shell B]

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.

[Amarok]

Today's Dilbert

Not sure that's a good strategy as the least bad is still bad .And you do realize the author of Dilbert is a fanatic Trump supporter .A bit of an odd pick to make a point .

---

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 .