If you can't name one critique of Biden, you worship him.
-
I think that if you don't criticize Biden at all, you are a sheep. Just my opinion.
-
Otherwise, if you can't name one flaw of Biden… that would mean you thought he was perfect. I'm really tired of this ghosty whiff of Biden farts.
-
You're not unbiased at all. You're not the voice of reason.
-
I can list loads of faults that Biden has…
Now, if you can't list the faults Trump has, then you must also worship him, by your same logic. Or if you can't list one flaw, then you must think he was perfect. And if you don't criticise Trump at all, then you are also... a sheep.
Care to confirm you also can list loads of faults that Trump has?
-
The very wording of this post raises an interesting point.
Why would anyone feel inclined to WORSHIP Biden - or any other president for that matter ?
In my personal view, much support for Trump is in fact a PERSONALITY CULT - where worship is indeed an appropriate description.
(Notice I said "much" support, but not all. There are Trump supporters who are more balanced, less emotional, and generally civil.)
A person who worships Trump may assume that Biden supporters have a similar desire for authoritarian leadership.
I assure you we do not - it was partly to get AWAY from the uncritical reverence of populist strongmen that so many voters rejected Trump this year.
-
You're joking right? Harris wants to pack the court with more judges. She wants to get rid of the electoral college. That's most definitely an authoritarian type of mentality. Denial of the obvious.
-
You're joking right? Harris wants to pack the court with more judges. She wants to get rid of the electoral college. That's most definitely an authoritarian type of mentality. Denial of the obvious.
Or sensible logical policy…
Trump packed the Supreme Court with his judges... so are you saying that was also a bad thing to do? (I would be inclined to agree with you if you’re saying both of them doing this is a bad thing and that judges should be a-political!)
And the electoral college system is antiquated and very outdated. Do you know why it was introduced?
-
He didn't pack the court. Roosevelt? Obama left them vacant. That was dumb. He obviously was setting the stage for the Freemason Trump to take power. This is all just a show. The Electoral College is there so we in say, Dallas, Texas, or Toledo, Kansas, don't become subject to the United States of Commifornia, where everyone is fleeing. However, in the instance that the Legislture (Pelosi) or the majority wants to contest, each State will send 1 elector, meaning Trump wins. You just don't like the system. How about Trump's tax cuts for 65% of people? Biden will eliminate that. Talk about authoritarian. Just for starters.
-
He didn't pack the court. Roosevelt? Obama left them vacant. That was dumb. He obviously was setting the stage for the Freemason Trump to take power. This is all just a show. The Electoral College is there so we in say, Dallas, Texas, or Toledo, Kansas, don't become subject to the United States of Commifornia, where everyone is fleeing. However, in the instance that the Legislture (Pelosi) or the majority wants to contest, each State will send 1 elector, meaning Trump wins. You just don't like the system. How about Trump's tax cuts for 65% of people? Biden will eliminate that. Talk about authoritarian. Just for starters.
This is just an unclear stream of consciousness… I'm not going to put it together sensibly for you. Would you like to try again and make it clear what you are attempting to say? Maybe you were tired when you wrote this...
The electoral college was not set up for you to not become "the United States of Commifornia" - whatever that is... it has a very clear reason for it being introduced. You should look into its history... and why it's there... and you would immediately know then that it is indeed, as I described it... antiquated and outdated.
-
No it's not. And you're also not an authority on such things. What I said is absolutely the purpose of the Electoral College. So that Oklahoma doesn't have to be ruled by New York. It's very simple. Different people, different lives, different places, different economies, different votes. That is precisely why the people of Oklahoma or Kansas don't want to abolish the Electoral College. Deny it if you like, your opinion is not even a case or a defense.
-
No it's not. And you're also not an authority on such things. What I said is absolutely the purpose of the Electoral College. So that Oklahoma doesn't have to be ruled by New York. It's very simple. Different people, different lives, different places, different economies, different votes. That is precisely why the people of Oklahoma or Kansas don't want to abolish the Electoral College. Deny it if you like, your opinion is not even a case or a defense.
Um… nope... it... literally... doesn’t do that. At all. Remove the electoral college tomorrow and you wouldn’t be ruled by New York any more than I would
How do you know so little about your democracy?!
It’s not my opinion either... as I said to you, look it up! Don’t believe me... go and look it up... literally anywhere!
Now look... I completely understand your fear. You’re worried that populations being larger in certain states means that the popular vote would always be with them... right? Well... that’s also what the electoral collage ensures (more populace states get more electoral college seats... it’s not a reverse correlation here...). So if you truly wanted a less populace state to have as much say as a more populated one... you would really need to get rid of the electoral college. And indeed change the entire nature of the US democracy...
Seriously... this stuff is school level information... why is it you don’t have it?
-
I'm sorry but you're wrong and your comment is disputed as factually incorrect.
-
I'm sorry but you're wrong and your comment is disputed as factually incorrect.
Again, when you want to be taken seriously, if you’re going to say someone is wrong… you need to explain why, in detail... not just claim they’re wrong.
Again... we’re not in pre-school any longer... we can do better...
-
What the fuck are you even talking about you stupid asshat? Nobody wants to be on the team of fucking losers.
-
What the fuck are you even talking about you stupid asshat? Nobody wants to be on the team of fucking losers.
Well, no, of course they don’t. Which is probably why you’re so angry and constantly calling people names…
-
OMG so I called you an asshat. Maybe because you could have made your case like, 3 years ago.
-
OMG so I called you an asshat. Maybe because you could have made your case like, 3 years ago.
Um, what?
You are calling people names… that’s childish. The end. There’s no excuse for it. It’s just childish. Unless of course you’re actually 5 as you claim... in which case, fair enough... you’re allowed to be a child when you’re a child
but if you’re an adult, then grow up.And what case did you want me to make to you 3 years ago?
-
I'm saying you're an asshat because you're kinda dumb. You don't really want a debate. You're probably a dumb college student in his dorm. I'd be happy to debate you face to face though. I've always been open, you are the cowards. I've pointed this out many times.
-
I'm saying you're an asshat because you're kinda dumb. You don't really want a debate. You're probably a dumb college student in his dorm. I'd be happy to debate you face to face though. I've always been open, you are the cowards. I've pointed this out many times.
So now a new excuse for name calling… but, as I’ve said before, the only reason is you’re behaving like a child. You can try and come up with a new excuse in every post you make... but you’re still acting like a child. Grow up.
Very happy to debate you face to face. Very happy.
Anything else you want me to prove you wrong on?
-
You're not debating RIGHT NOW. That's what's going on. And you're a stupid idiot because you're pretending like it isn't happening.
