So, in your pov, if 200 people are doing the same job, they should all get the same outcomes, regardless of performance?

You could just say "opps" and be honest... rather than huff and puff...

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
So, in your pov, if 200 people are doing the same job, they should all get the same outcomes, regardless of performance?

You could just say "opps" and be honest... rather than huff and puff...

He can HuffPost and HuffPost all he wants.

He will find out the GOP house if built of brick and mortar.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
WTF. Go ahead and list whatever flaws you deem real regarding the left.

Be sure to differentiate those pertaining to NZ and the US, unless you conflate and just can't separate.

Yeah. WTF is right. ME recently I have given an open opinion that Kamala is the best option being offered. That if I were in the US, Id vote for her over trump or biden. Even though I think she's not the best option.

And yet You are so bent out of shape that you feel the need to place presuppositions as defence. Thats the second reply where you felt the need to somehow cut me off from full answer. Many, many of the US lefts problems, are western nations left problems.
How do I respond in all seriousness? If my living elsewhere means my opinion will be automatically invalidated?

So. I was sitting here thinking how do I reply in a manor that cuts out any option for blaming conflation and inability to seperate. My process was, Dont reply yourself. Find an American who outlines your thoughts. Click youtube. Type keywords.

Now my humour has hit, as the first video that came up was engaging, common sense, thoughtful and contained a great explanation!

But its a young, Black, English woman. Here comes the conflation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKBLn--BBdg

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
So, in your pov, if 200 people are doing the same job, they should all get the same outcomes, regardless of performance?

You could just say "opps" and be honest... rather than huff and puff...

I just shake my head and grin. No, that's not it. Guess again.

Yea, I could say oops easily when appropriate.

And you could apologize.

Which is more likely?

BTW, I already did say oops in several ways re the Palin mistake I made.

You owe me at least three apologies.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
So. I was sitting here thinking how do I reply in a manor that cuts out any option for blaming conflation and inability to seperate. My process was, Dont reply yourself. Find an American who outlines your thoughts. Click youtube. Type keywords.

Now my humour has hit, as the first video that came up was engaging, common sense, thoughtful and contained a great explanation!

But its a young, Black, English woman. Here comes the conflation.

A search is easy: https://www.google.com/search?...bLAg&sclient=gws-wiz

But you deflect.

Since you are so certain about the left's flaws, I was asking for your list of the flaws you seem so certain about.

The search above should help. You can pick and choose.

Magine.

My beautiful, wonderful, articulate, well reasoned (but wrong headed Magine.


You gotta slow it down a little.


I’ve had a rough day and it’s tiring to keep up with “the grip it and rip it” posts from your team of flying monkeys and it’s not giving me as much time to listen and try to work through your reasoning.

ME, that pretty much underlines exactly what im saying. Read your link through and then read my post.

quote:

Id suggest thats a very flawed summary. People out there recognise the division the left is well part of creating as well. and arguments really dont work when you get cute and try make something out of matching alphabet letters. The left, is a megalith right now. The right is too. The cute play on words would be Magalith. 2020 Im pleased Joe is gone, Kamala is a better choice. But she's not a great choice and that she automatically got the role shows how archaic and stuck the left is.
Zeaihan is correct, there is only a few voters in the country who will decide this election. Those in the middle. They will be choosing on who is least worse. You do no favours to the left in not recognising how truely awful they are right now yourself. In fact i see more recognition from the right in the GOPs flaws, than I do the other way round.

quote:

You do no favours to the left in not recognising how truely awful they are right now yourself. In fact i see more recognition from the right in the GOPs flaws, than I do the other way round.

All I said, IOW, is that I agree with you, partially. I don't recognize how "truely awful" the left is right now. I recognize it in the right.

So I raised the question, mostly to myself. Is it my bias or objectivity that leads me to not recognize what you and others apparently see?

In order to satisfy that question, I asked you to point out some of the "truely awful" flaws or things pertaining to the Left.

What you have said are summary opinions which is common. Conflating opinions with facts. It's SOP.

So, I understand what you are saying.

That's what I'm saying.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I actually watched it....he seemed to be having fun. And yes they started 35 minutes late. The electronics weren't working well and it was an attempted ambush. Kamala was supposed to be there and she chickened out.....

Ill bet Kamala wouldn't show up if invited to a similar conservative group interview....

Harris was not scheduled to be there, that would have made it a debate.

Trump's scared to debate her.

And it wasn't "electronics" that caused the delay, it was Trump trying to nix real-time fact checking.

From what I've read, jeff5 has stated facts.

And JTEX is a continuous stream of lies.

From,my experience you only see exactly and only what you "want" to see, like most leftists....

.

quote:

From,my experience you only see exactly and only what you "want" to see, like most leftists....

I "see" you and don't want to.

Yea, I snuck a peak, although you are on ignore.

It's like "seeing" a naked fat lady laying in bed with her legs spread. You can't unsee some things. Too ugly.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

You do no favours to the left in not recognising how truely awful they are right now yourself. In fact i see more recognition from the right in the GOPs flaws, than I do the other way round.

All I said, IOW, is that I agree with you, partially. I don't recognize how "truely awful" the left is right now. I recognize it in the right.

So I raised the question, mostly to myself. Is it my bias or objectivity that leads me to not recognize what you and others apparently see?

In order to satisfy that question, I asked you to point out some of the "truely awful" flaws or things pertaining to the Left.

What you have said are summary opinions which is common. Conflating opinions with facts. It's SOP.

So, I understand what you are saying.

That's what I'm saying.

Actually Ive just realised the link I thought I had posted did not show. Have addressed that so my reply makes sense.
This was the young english women I referred too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKBLn--BBdg

She's worthwhile watching.

If the question was to yourself, thats fine. It didnt come across that way. But im not sure you can self evaluate effectively.

Take your assertions that Trump owns the party. Thats clearly subjective. In the same way it could be stated that an old man suffering severe senility is being kept in place by a party solely for their purpose of retaining power.

Fact is, as the Pew study states. The democrats are loosing support just as the republicans are. And of those that retain support. More republicans are currently willing to criticise their party, than democrats.

quote:

I asked you to point out some of the "truely awful" flaws or things pertaining to the Left.

So, you missed the real question (above) by choosing the setup question which was basically saying that I question my own ability to distinguish between bias and objectivity. Whether I can or not, the starting place is to ask oneself the question of introspection That's something that I think most people avoid religiously, to use the precise word.

"Owns" is easier to type than dominates, which is not subjective.

Well, I watched part of the video you linked and agree it's a good one. I'll be sure to watch it all, leisurely (not lei surly). It stirs thought and perspective.

And it made me realize that I'm conservative.

So, that really does answer my question quoted above in a back door sorta way. I must be among "republicans (who) are currently willing to criticise their party".

So, you see, introspection is soooo useful. Thanks for the insight.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

I asked you to point out some of the "truely awful" flaws or things pertaining to the Left.

So, you missed the real question (above) by choosing the setup question which was basically saying that I question my own ability to distinguish between bias and objectivity. Whether I can or not, the starting place is to ask oneself the question of introspection That's something that I think most people avoid religiously, to use the precise word.

"Owns" is easier to type than dominates, which is not subjective.

Well, I watched part of the video you linked and agree it's a good one. I'll be sure to watch it all, leisurely (not lei surly). It stirs thought and perspective.

And it made me realize that I'm conservative.

So, that really does answer my question quoted above in a back door sorta way. I must be among "republicans (who) are currently willing to criticise their party".

So, you see, introspection is soooo useful. Thanks for the insight.

I criticize the Republican Party often.


However compared to the Democrats the republicans are a “Shininb. city on a Hill”.

quote:

I criticize the Republican Party often.

So we have something in-common.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

I criticize the Republican Party often.

So we have something in-common.

We probably have several things in common to be honest.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

I asked you to point out some of the "truely awful" flaws or things pertaining to the Left.

So, you missed the real question (above) by choosing the setup question which was basically saying that I question my own ability to distinguish between bias and objectivity. Whether I can or not, the starting place is to ask oneself the question of introspection That's something that I think most people avoid religiously, to use the precise word.

"Owns" is easier to type than dominates, which is not subjective.

Well, I watched part of the video you linked and agree it's a good one. I'll be sure to watch it all, leisurely (not lei surly). It stirs thought and perspective.

And it made me realize that I'm conservative.

So, that really does answer my question quoted above in a back door sorta way. I must be among "republicans (who) are currently willing to criticise their party".

So, you see, introspection is soooo useful. Thanks for the insight.

Heres a tip. If you want people to understand you. Use the correct word instead of being lazy then. hell at times I will bring up a second tab, Type in the word I wish to use and check its meaning to be sure im using the correct one.

If You truely were introspecting. You would recognise the snarkyness of your replies. And intent to burn others/ inherent hatred that you cant leave out.

If you really payed attention. You would see that I have indirectly answered that question with two main flaws.

Im not however going to answer it directly. because if you go back too my initial post and read it. I said you do Yourself no favours in not recognising them. if I answer, it gives you room for argument. I already know you will find any way to dis- credit or disallow or justify them. This is the lack of favours you do yourself.
Just easier to be lazy, snarky, blame religion, roll your eyes etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Hasher:
I criticize the Republican Party often.

However compared to the Democrats the republicans are a “Shining. city on a Hill”.

Shining city behind a wall?

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

I asked you to point out some of the "truely awful" flaws or things pertaining to the Left.

So, you missed the real question (above) by choosing the setup question which was basically saying that I question my own ability to distinguish between bias and objectivity. Whether I can or not, the starting place is to ask oneself the question of introspection That's something that I think most people avoid religiously, to use the precise word.

"Owns" is easier to type than dominates, which is not subjective.

Well, I watched part of the video you linked and agree it's a good one. I'll be sure to watch it all, leisurely (not lei surly). It stirs thought and perspective.

And it made me realize that I'm conservative.

So, that really does answer my question quoted above in a back door sorta way. I must be among "republicans (who) are currently willing to criticise their party".

So, you see, introspection is soooo useful. Thanks for the insight.

Heres a tip. If you want people to understand you. Use the correct word instead of being lazy then. hell at times I will bring up a second tab, Type in the word I wish to use and check its meaning to be sure im using the correct one.

If You truely were introspecting. You would recognise the snarkyness of your replies. And intent to burn others/ inherent hatred that you cant leave out.

If you really payed attention. You would see that I have indirectly answered that question with two main flaws.

Im not however going to answer it directly. because if you go back too my initial post and read it. I said you do Yourself no favours in not recognising them. if I answer, it gives you room for argument. I already know you will find any way to dis- credit or disallow or justify them. This is the lack of favours you do yourself.
Just easier to be lazy, snarky, blame religion, roll your eyes etc.

I too bring up a second tab to check words for correct meanings and usage, sometimes select synonym, etc. I also do spell check and punctuation check too. Why do you think I make my paragraphs short and double space between them? Others have adopted that style as well. I also edit my posts often, by reading after posting, and correcting. I also test the links after I post to make sure I didn't make a mistake and they actually work.

I used the word "own" because IMO it's sharp and more pejorative than dominates, and I have applied it to individual ownership. Like Trump owns his supporters and the GOP.

My posts are mostly snarky, intentionally, except this one. But it's not from hate. You embellished that, maybe projected it.

Yes, if you answered my question directly, you know darn well it is likely to provide fodder for me to argue the points. That's part of the reason I asked it. Another reason was for the off chance you would be lucid, and I would have nothing to argue about. Another reason was to see if you could actually do it.

Most of the time when Rightist people post their opinions herein, they state them as fact and apparently believe they are facts. When pinned down about it, really, they look like fools. It's funny to see them try. Often they support their opinion deemed fact with more opinion deemed fact. It's circular. They can't defend themselves and deflect, name calling, etc. Your tactic is to throw it back, deflect, etc. but not name calling so much.

What you do is also a tactic to control the conversation, and not be controlled. I understand that and do it myself sometimes. But if I'm comfortable with my opinion, simply because of facts and evidence behind it, I often just offer the support if questioned. If someone gets nasty, I have a rule for myself that I apply and try to abide. The rule for myself is to not reply nastily in kind, especially name calling. I do allow myself to be snarky when I feel like it.

Are you that worried that I might pick apart your answer to my question? I'm flattered. (Is that snarky?)

Just sat down after the days work and read this and honestly had a good natured chuckle with no ill will intended.

My bit about bringing up another tab, was my attempt at a snarky reply. I must have failed because you felt the need to clarify/correct the assumption.
I know you well enough to respect your understanding of english.

But in all honesty, I generally, except when a post is egregious, post in good faith, humour and honesty until I feel those traits are not being returned.

There is nothing wrong with controlling where a conversation gos. You cant demand it, as say Naki does, but sticking too your lane is valid, and I appreciate the battle of wills I get with you in such cases.
And so I see with this line-

quote:

Are you that worried that I might pick apart your answer to my question? I'm flattered. Smiler (Is that snarky?) Smiler

Your attempt to assert control.

Heres how I see it. My point is you dont recognise the lefts flaws are having an effect. In taking this argument too me, you are proving me correct!

I am starting to beleive the left will win this election. But not because they are good. As I said, because they are least worst.

And that should have been your argument to shut me down.

"yep the left isn't great, I expect better, But you and I should both agree we need them to win."

And I would have agreed with you.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Just sat down after the days work and read this and honestly had a good natured chuckle with no ill will intended.

My bit about bringing up another tab, was my attempt at a snarky reply. I must have failed because you felt the need to clarify/correct the assumption.
I know you well enough to respect your understanding of english.

But in all honesty, I generally, except when a post is egregious, post in good faith, humour and honesty until I feel those traits are not being returned.

There is nothing wrong with controlling where a conversation gos. You cant demand it, as say Naki does, but sticking too your lane is valid, and I appreciate the battle of wills I get with you in such cases.
And so I see with this line-

quote:

Are you that worried that I might pick apart your answer to my question? I'm flattered. Smiler (Is that snarky?) Smiler

Your attempt to assert control.

Heres how I see it. My point is you dont recognise the lefts flaws are having an effect. In taking this argument too me, you are proving me correct!

I am starting to beleive the left will win this election. But not because they are good. As I said, because they are least worst.

And that should have been your argument to shut me down.

"yep the left isn't great, I expect better, But you and I should both agree we need them to win."

And I would have agreed with you.

The left will win because they are better at voter intimidation and vote fraud and because they have the most celebrity backing.

And I would probably throw the same accusation your way as I did with ME.

One of your parties has to step up and stop blaming the other guy for your position. The4 first party that does that and actually fields a top class candidate with moderate views will storm to victory.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
And I would probably throw the same accusation your way as I did with ME.

One of your parties has to step up and stop blaming the other guy for your position. The4 first party that does that and actually fields a top class candidate with moderate views will storm to victory.

This will never and can never happen.

It likely started with Nixon in 68 and his enemies list.

That was the very beginning of the “politics of personal destruction “.

In the 90’w it was honed to a razors edge by the Clinton’s.

While it wasn’t too bad during the GWB and Obama administrations Al thought it started ramping up on both sides during they Obama/Romney/and that other guy we ran campaigns it came completely unglued during the Hillary/Trump election.


Bottom line is the best candidates want no part of having their lives inspected and torn apart down to their childhood.



We will never get the best because all we are left with is the Evil of two Lessers”.

Yep but its not up too the parties unless you let it be. You are quite entitled, as quite a few right leaning members here have, to say you are disappointed. And if that mentality catches on. Telling your representatives that you are disappointed. Maybe even voting for the least worst option once. Then it might make a difference. It bloody well sharpened up our right over the last 9 years when we walked away.

quote:

We will never get the best because all we are left with is the Evil of two Lessers”.

Just re read that properly, and its quite a clever change in structure.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:

quote:

We will never get the best because all we are left with is the Evil of two Lessers”.

Just re read that properly, and its quite a clever change in structure.

It came from an old GF of mine. She was more the classic Carter Democrat/Liberal.


We were having dinner and drinks and discussion the Obama va whatever candidate we ran and I commented that because of the politics of destruction we were left with the lesser of two evils. She replied that the destruction drives out the best candidates and that only leave us with the Evil of two Lwssaes.

quote:

quote:
Are you that worried that I might pick apart your answer to my question? I'm flattered. Smiler (Is that snarky?) Smiler


Your attempt to assert control.

Maybe, if there is "control" to be had. I see none in this case.

OTOH, it could be a statement about the shameless can't be shamed.

Or Hitchens's razor: "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens%27s_razor

Or maybe it's a statement "no hat cowboy" sorta thing.

Or all of the above

Anyway: The lesser of two weevils:

https://youtu.be/e4PzpxOj5Cc?si=swAwiU0xUUJ8iUQ0

Shanks, I'll answer my question to you, for you:

https://youtu.be/R2w-kNI29k0?si=9PkOlPhBPBxCmFsU

Archie Bunker on Democrats

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Shanks, I'll answer my question to you, for you:

https://youtu.be/R2w-kNI29k0?si=9PkOlPhBPBxCmFsU

Archie Bunker on Democrats

Fictional characters as facts.


That’s a new one.

"Thisnis double plus ungood."

And all along I thought Archie Bunker was real, perhaps another of your heroes.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
"Thisnis double plus ungood."

And all along I thought Archie Bunker was real, perhaps another of your heroes.

Nope I much preferred Fonzie.

quote:

Nope I much preferred Fonzie.

That's something else we have in common.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

quote:
Are you that worried that I might pick apart your answer to my question? I'm flattered. Smiler (Is that snarky?) Smiler


Your attempt to assert control.

Maybe, if there is "control" to be had. I see none in this case.

OTOH, it could be a statement about the shameless can't be shamed.

Or Hitchens's razor: "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens%27s_razor

Or maybe it's a statement "no hat cowboy" sorta thing.

Or all of the above

Anyway: The lesser of two weevils:

https://youtu.be/e4PzpxOj5Cc?si=swAwiU0xUUJ8iUQ0

Master and commander is an awesome movie! The directors and producers that work for that party chose the perfect lead actor as candidate and he did a great job with a great team of supporting actors.

Control.

The post you seem hung up on. My main point Was that you do no favours too yourself and the left. Heres the kicker that I hoped you'd realise yourself. I never said the left was flawed.
I said they were awful. I gave my opinion that your summary was flawed.

You seem to have conflated the two.

You are asserting control by demanding I answer too a statement I never made. while trying to deny admittance of the one I did make.

Your denials are the proof I need of the main statement i made.

If you wish to play cowboys. You should perhaps identify the hat first.

Your initial assertion:

quote:

You do no favours to the left in not recognising how truely awful they are right now yourself. In fact i see more recognition from the right in the GOPs flaws, than I do the other way round.

My response:

quote:

Well, I would like to know what the flaws of the left really are.

"awful" flaws are still flaws, just awful ones.

Comparing "truely awful" democrats to GOPs flaws, is a conflation that I didn't initiate. You did and I just went with it.

It's okay with me if you use it to stretch your deception and deflection. Just be honest about it.

And I don't believe I demanded. I just asked.

Right I see now why you have picked that. I apologise.

Do you beleive that was the intent of my post? or that I could have just written the last line better.

My mistake. Do you wish to hang your hat on that? Or accept my intent?

quote:

I apologise.

Let this be marked down in the BIG book of time and space.

Congrats. Your esteem has been restored refreshed.

I owe you one.

We had a misunderstanding. Thanks for listening.

I can't remember ever having someone herein apologize to me. It occasionally happens to/with others. It's rare. I have done it a few times, but try to work around it.

You were direct.

And I accept your intent, as well-intended, after all.

My question to you - have I been respectful - enough or for the most part? In the heat of argument it's too easy to lose that.

Yes thats why I apologised. I mistook your path as dishonest not realising How I had written something. Im usually on the ball in knowing what I have said, and my confidence lead me not to go back and check.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Yes thats why I apologised. I mistook your path as dishonest not realising How I had written something. Im usually on the ball in knowing what I have said, and my confidence lead me not to go back and check.

Much respect

I don't want to belabor this, but there is something to learn here.

quote:

my confidence

That seems to be the key regarding what happened and your path.

Confidence is a good thing almost always.

The distinction here is ill intentioned vs good/well intentioned.

We covered that and agree that you were well-intended and so was I.

Given those distinctions as a guide to measure by, we can quickly see through most intentions, good or ill. When in doubt, some careful open-ended wording of a follow-up post will reveal what's up, or what's going down.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I actually watched it....he seemed to be having fun. And yes they started 35 minutes late. The electronics weren't working well and it was an attempted ambush. Kamala was supposed to be there and she chickened out.....

Ill bet Kamala wouldn't show up if invited to a similar conservative group interview....

Harris was not scheduled to be there, that would have made it a debate.

Trump's scared to debate her.

And it wasn't "electronics" that caused the delay, it was Trump trying to nix real-time fact checking.

From what I've read, jeff5 has stated facts.

And JTEX is a continuous stream of lies.

From,my experience you only see exactly and only what you "want" to see, like most leftists....

.

On,y people who see the TRUTH are those with their heads up Trump’s arse!