Clearly you don’t understand what a whataboutism is.
Your position was logically indefensible, which I have demonstrated (without your answers, or lack thereof, to my original challenge) even after you moved the goalposts. If you wish to discuss this further, you’ll need to clear the initial (very low) bar I laid out for honest discourse. It’s time you put some skin in the game, instead of polluting my screen with vacuous replies from the safety of political/social anonymity.
The idea that campaigns get aborted is indefensible? That we don’t elect presidents for 8 years? or That the DNC leans hard on any dissent to prevent such an end to Biden’s campaign? Which idea there is indefensible? The only thing you’ve done is denied, fearmongered, and shouted what about trump. That’s not something I’m going to spend more than a couple minutes responding to.
The idea that campaigns get aborted is indefensible?
No, you’re moving your goalpost again.
We have not “aborted” the campaign of an incumbent president.
That we don’t elect presidents for 8 years?
This is a poor strawman that you have built and has been refuted, please refer back.
That the DNC leans hard on any dissent to prevent such an end to Biden’s campaign
Finally, something new and of substance. Yes, the DNC has had a history of picking favorite candidates. Unfortunately, this is the first time you’ve brought this up, hence why I haven’t addressed it, and at this point, I have serious doubts about you arguing in good faith. Please address my original questions before I address any more of yours.
The only thing you’ve done is denied, fearmongered, and shouted what about trump.
Citations needed.
That’s not something I’m going to spend more than a couple minutes responding to.
Yep, and it shows, with your piss poor logic, inability to recall, and time wasting dribble that you call a “response”.
I’m glad you unilaterally decided that.
Actually, you decided that.
Answer the questions already.
I’m not going to engage in whataboutism.
Clearly you don’t understand what a whataboutism is.
Your position was logically indefensible, which I have demonstrated (without your answers, or lack thereof, to my original challenge) even after you moved the goalposts. If you wish to discuss this further, you’ll need to clear the initial (very low) bar I laid out for honest discourse. It’s time you put some skin in the game, instead of polluting my screen with vacuous replies from the safety of political/social anonymity.
The idea that campaigns get aborted is indefensible? That we don’t elect presidents for 8 years? or That the DNC leans hard on any dissent to prevent such an end to Biden’s campaign? Which idea there is indefensible? The only thing you’ve done is denied, fearmongered, and shouted what about trump. That’s not something I’m going to spend more than a couple minutes responding to.
No, you’re moving your goalpost again. We have not “aborted” the campaign of an incumbent president.
This is a poor strawman that you have built and has been refuted, please refer back.
Finally, something new and of substance. Yes, the DNC has had a history of picking favorite candidates. Unfortunately, this is the first time you’ve brought this up, hence why I haven’t addressed it, and at this point, I have serious doubts about you arguing in good faith. Please address my original questions before I address any more of yours.
Citations needed.
Yep, and it shows, with your piss poor logic, inability to recall, and time wasting dribble that you call a “response”.
The citation is this thread.
Disingenuous troll is disingenuous, color me surprised. Take a hike.
This from the guy who says you only get to vote against your party’s president before they’re president.
If you’re going to deny things that clearly exist then I’m under no obligation to take you seriously.