The Right Fails Leadership 101: Vote Left!

PoliTalker said:
Here's the American right in a nutshell.

Deny / Ignore any crises.

When the expected objections come, then throw a big hissy-fit for the cameras. Make it real dramatic.

The followers eat it right up.

Power secured. The misinformed are motivated enough to vote in more nonsense.

We, the well informed, are what stands in the way of that.

We must vote out the right and vote in the left.
Click to expand...

You have not described any crisis other than 'climate crisis', which you STILL have not defined.
 
PoliTalker said:
Just look at Ted Cruz.

There is a threat of violence at school board meetings across the nation.

Attorney General Garland has correctly alerted the FBI to investigate it.

What does Cruz do about this situation?

Deny it is a problem and throw a hissy-fit that preventative action has been taken.

Right on cue.

Garland: DOJ Memo Said Nothing About Investigating Parents For Domestic Terrorism

""That is not what the memo says at all," Garland replied."
Click to expand...

Paranoia.
 
PoliTalker said:
Parents are refusing to accept common sense mask mandates at schools which are meant to protect the public during a deadly pandemic. They are calling it 'tyranny.' There have been threats of violence and stalking at school board meetings.

The situation is escalating as the sensible and needed mandates increase.

And it is going to become more heated because the next logical step is going to be vaccine mandates.
Click to expand...

Paradox M. Paradox V. Unconstitutional.
 
WATCH: Turning Point Rally Attendee Asks When “We Get To Use The Guns” On Democrats — And Charlie Kirk Names The Time





It’s on tape
 
Into the Night said:
Define 'climate crisis'.

As for covid19, it is YOU wanting to shut down economies and force mandated vaccines and mask wearing. Paradox M. Paradox V.
Click to expand...

How many times have we seen this from "nightengale," "define climate crisis," and when one does, he returns with semantical mazes or some contrarian's view that he attempts to employ to create a false paradigm

Well least he didn't respond with his often attack on phrases via dangling participles
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Climate crisis?

We were told like 30 years ago, that Pacific Islands and the East coast of the US would be underwater by now...
All the glaciers would be gone...
There'd be tens of millions of "climate refugees" fleeing coastal areas and places that had become inhospitable to life...
etc., etc., etc...

We were told the solution was to end carbon use. Solar and wind have proven disastrous busts when attempted on a large scale. Battery cars aren't very popular even with upwards of 50% subsidies on them in some countries.
The so-called climate scientists keep revising their disaster scenarios downward while pushing radical changes in government and economics upward.

We had an autistic teenager telling us the world's going to end in eight years and our idiot leaders nod their heads sagely.

The climate isn't in crisis, common sense and good science are.
Click to expand...

The Church of Global Warming denies the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. They somehow believe a magick gas has the power to create energy out of nothing, reduce entropy, and prevent light from leaving Earth. They also try to install a frequency term into the Stefan-Boltzmann law and try to describe the emissivity constant as an inverse of itself.

What you are seeing is fascism dressed up as 'science'.
 
Into the Night said:
YOU want war.
Click to expand...

It's what I call projective political tactics. If someone from the uber-left says you are bad because you <insert whatever here>, then you can rest assured that they are quite literally doing whatever they insert into the equation that they pretend to believe you are doing. It is a tactic that makes it look like anyone saying they are doing it is the equivalent of a child saying, "No, YOU ARE!" in an argument.
 
archives said:
I know, because you have to, they used to teach us the same thing in junior high debate class, easy way to reframe content when you are stuck for a rebutal

Trump owns the GOP, you can deflect with semantics, but fact remains, the GOP is Trump

Not what the historians agree on

And their oracle in the cave

Have umpteen times, usually resulting in some contrarian's opinion you'll attempt to frame as an equivalence

See 2020 for verification

Recognizing a problem exists

What you are bloviating

Emojis are corny unless you are a middle school girl

And lets see now if you can break it all down into articles and pronouns
Click to expand...

He has rebutted. Trump does not own the GOP, but the GOP does support Trump. You don't get to speak for historians. You only get to speak for you. Omniscience fallacy. There was no election in 2020. Biden was not elected. Biden was installed, like a toilet. You haven't defined The Problem. Void argument fallacy. Now let's see you can follow where my comments apply to your post.
 
It won’t be Democratic Party members fighting with guns



It will be republicans and police and military idiot
 
archives said:
How many times have we seen this from "nightengale," "define climate crisis," and when one does, he returns with semantical mazes or some contrarian's view that he attempts to employ to create a false paradigm

Well least he didn't respond with his often attack on phrases via dangling participles
Click to expand...

No one has ever defined 'climate change', 'global warming', or 'climate crisis'. These are all meaningless buzzwords.
Maybe YOU can have a go at defining any of these terms. Remember, you cannot define any word with itself or with another undefined word.

Go ahead.
 
Damocles said:
It's what I call projective political tactics. If someone from the uber-left says you are bad because you <insert whatever here>, then you can rest assured that they are quite literally doing whatever they insert into the equation that they pretend to believe you are doing. It is a tactic that makes it look like anyone saying they are doing it is the equivalent of a child saying, "No, YOU ARE!" in an argument.
Click to expand...

The pee wee defense


Your team wants to shoot people
 
Damocles said:
It's what I call projective political tactics. If someone from the uber-left says you are bad because you <insert whatever here>, then you can rest assured that they are quite literally doing whatever they insert into the equation that they pretend to believe you are doing. It is a tactic that makes it look like anyone saying they are doing it is the equivalent of a child saying, "No, YOU ARE!" in an argument.
Click to expand...

Bingo.This is also known as an inversion fallacy. It is projecting their own problems upon another, inverting the argument. A common tactic among the left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top