The latest news and live updates on the 2024 election. Follow the Trump-Vance and Harris-Walz campaigns ahead of the presidential election in November.
So you agree that the nazi guy is helping Harris by him alienating progressive voters from Stein.
Then you have to conclude that he is just very very dumb, or you have to agree with my statement, that he wants to harm Stein and help Harris. Which brings the important question, what does the nazi guy gain from helping Harris?
As the guy was leading a large organization, him being dumb is unlikely. Him being good at scheming and manipulating on the other hand is very much on brand.
I never said any of those things. And therefore your conclusion is without an ounce of merit. What I am saying, is that he genuinely is in support of her because she aligns with his belief.
I’m not doing this thing with you where you put me on a defensive so as to not have to debate in good faith.
Everthing you say starts off with “so what you’re saying is…” or “so your argument is….”
…. and then entirely misrepresenting the statement made, which gives one to leave the wheelhouse of the discussion to defend themselves. It’s such a blatantly obvious tactic to use, I’m surprised it even still works.
Wel, either way- it’s not happening here. I said exactly what I said- and I was very clear about what I said. Misrepresenting my statements and those of others is by definition- arguing in bad faith and is against the rules of the community.
You said Steins goal is to take votes from Harris. So the target audience is potential Harris voters. So the target audience of the “endorsement” would be potential Harris voters. But the guy is a Nazi so he is alienating potential Harris voters from Stein, bringing them back to Harris.
If his target audience would be Trump voters he would also be helping Harris by moving Trump voters from Trump.
Either way Harris wins by this endorsement and this is his intended goal.
You just kept insulting me and making accusations instead of addressing the logical inconsistency in your contradicting claims
I have not insulted you once this entire conversation.
He isn’t intending to move Trump voters from Trump. Just like how the MAGA trolls here that pretend to be “leftists” can safely bag on Trump knowing no one here is voting for him anyway. They wouldn’t be doing anyone any favors by posting pro-Trump rhetoric in plain sight. They’d be laughed off the site.
But sewing dissent can be enough to sway a close election.
And there are a lot of right-of center voters that are on the fence that would back him over Trump- and therefore will support Shill- I mean…
Yes.
So you agree that the nazi guy is helping Harris by him alienating progressive voters from Stein.
Then you have to conclude that he is just very very dumb, or you have to agree with my statement, that he wants to harm Stein and help Harris. Which brings the important question, what does the nazi guy gain from helping Harris?
As the guy was leading a large organization, him being dumb is unlikely. Him being good at scheming and manipulating on the other hand is very much on brand.
Do not build a strawman here bud.
I never said any of those things. And therefore your conclusion is without an ounce of merit. What I am saying, is that he genuinely is in support of her because she aligns with his belief.
Shills of a feather…
So you think that he beliefs his target audience to be Democrat voters?
Or do you think he wants to siphon off votes of Trump?
Because that would also help Harris, but contradict your statement regarding Stein being there to damage Harris and help Trump.
Stop building strawmen.
So your argument is that any basic logic is a strawman, because you dont want to face the logical contradictions in your statements?
Lets go back to the start:
What do you think he wants to achieve?
Who do you think is his target audience for the endorsement?
What do you think are the goals of Steins campaign?
I’m not doing this thing with you where you put me on a defensive so as to not have to debate in good faith.
Everthing you say starts off with “so what you’re saying is…” or “so your argument is….”
…. and then entirely misrepresenting the statement made, which gives one to leave the wheelhouse of the discussion to defend themselves. It’s such a blatantly obvious tactic to use, I’m surprised it even still works.
Wel, either way- it’s not happening here. I said exactly what I said- and I was very clear about what I said. Misrepresenting my statements and those of others is by definition- arguing in bad faith and is against the rules of the community.
Keep pushing this and I will shut it down.
I said he wants to help Harris by harming Stein.
This is painstakenly obvios.
You said Steins goal is to take votes from Harris. So the target audience is potential Harris voters. So the target audience of the “endorsement” would be potential Harris voters. But the guy is a Nazi so he is alienating potential Harris voters from Stein, bringing them back to Harris.
If his target audience would be Trump voters he would also be helping Harris by moving Trump voters from Trump.
Either way Harris wins by this endorsement and this is his intended goal.
You just kept insulting me and making accusations instead of addressing the logical inconsistency in your contradicting claims
I have not insulted you once this entire conversation.
He isn’t intending to move Trump voters from Trump. Just like how the MAGA trolls here that pretend to be “leftists” can safely bag on Trump knowing no one here is voting for him anyway. They wouldn’t be doing anyone any favors by posting pro-Trump rhetoric in plain sight. They’d be laughed off the site.
But sewing dissent can be enough to sway a close election.
And there are a lot of right-of center voters that are on the fence that would back him over Trump- and therefore will support Shill- I mean…
Jill.