Paging the @Narrator
https://twitter.com/eliehonig/status/1295119833198137345?s=21
1 Like
So Nancy moved 24 hours slower than the internet. Pretty good.
All of this works better as an ad. Itâs better for them to go that way than expecting news media to do their advertising for them. Mainstream news is never going to present the issue as Democrats are right and the GOP is a depraved party who will cheat at any cost, even though that is the correct interpretation. It would end up going through the both sides machine.
Câmon, nunn. Theyâre just going to make up whatever argument they want/need to make up to suit their needs. See: Garland, Merrick vs. current SCOTUS situation if RGB passes.
3 Likes
Sounds like as good idea as any to just let it slide and say youâre a-ok with overthrowing the Constitutional Democracy without a fight. Doing nothing is not the answer here, just like it wasnât the answer on the bailout, and just like it wasnât the answer to the president doing completely unconstitutional EOs. Thatâs kind of the point. If you say, âno one will do anythingâ, it is 100 percent certain no one will. You may not care if the enemies of the Constitution in Congress are on the record undermining it rather than holding up the oath they swore to it, but I sure do.
Put this in the context of George Floyd. Youâre saying nothing will change, so whatâs the point? The point is that it actually sets people on edge against whatâs wrong about the various situations weâre describing. Doing nothing just pushes the line out further.
This is the difference, and why the MSNBC ~ FOX is a terrible take. Having a slant/spin/bias is worlds away from the unmitigated propagandist lies from FOX.
2 Likes
Did I say that? Youâve just gotta get it through your skull that the GOP is never ever ever acting in good faith ever again until we bring them to their knees and curb stomp them in an election.
Iâm all for impeaching Barr and DeJoy, but if you expect removal, youâre high.
How is it you still donât get what Iâm saying? Iâm saying if you donât put a non-elected official deserving of impeachment up for impeachment, you are saying you literally donât care about oversight of the Executive Branch at all (this has not been tested). It is imperative to impeach someone to see how deep the bad faith runs, and itâs crucial to get these enemies on the record.
This is not about whether the GOP will convict, this is about making them say they wonât ON THE RECORD. Since youâre so desiring a political âwinâ this is it, a political calculation to show everyone whoâs against doing the right thing on the record.
And my point stands that with your level of cynicism no one will do anything, which is giving it all up without a fight, sorry.
Every time Iâve turned on Fox the last two weeks (I know lol me) Iâve learned that Democrat run cities are currently over-run with crime and looters and this is the biggest issue in the USA now. It is remarkable.
The House impeaching people who the Senate will never convict is like the House passing bills that the Senate will never pass, which is something that you support in some cases. The problem is that we have a Democratic establishment that doesnât know how to use these things for propaganda purposes.
2 Likes
Dude Iâm saying they SHOULD impeach him. I called my Senators and Rep demanding as much. Iâm just saying there is no shot of conviction.
Here is the language you used.
By saying âwhetherâ, by saying âlitmus testâ, you talk as if the outcome is in doubt. If you had said, âtâs very important to impeach at least one of these monsters to show that the Senate doesnât believe in oversight of anyone in the Trump administrationâ, that would have made your meaning less ambiguous.
Maybe Iâd like to believe theyâd do something even if I think they wonât. Thatâs why the language is the way it is.
Hope makes you soft. You canât fight Republicans at the level required without the necessarily cynicism that there is no other way.
1 Like
Please not this shit again man, I for real canât take it.
1 Like
Boy, imagine living here watching people getting ready to be thrown out on their asses and unnecessarily dying because people just have to have a political âwinâ. This site and Congress is more concerned about protecting voting that happens nearly three months from now more than people who will be losing everything and/or dying in a matter of weeks. I canât take that but so many people are willing to take that to get some never materializing win against people who are gleeful about the exact outcomes youâre expecting. The cynicism and true lack of caring of believing that nothing could change is exactly why it isnât.
Go ask Chads whether he thinks anything heâs doing is going to stop police from killing people and cracking heads in the short term. Then ask him why heâs doing it anyway. Thatâs the path you should be following instead of your you âcanât take itâ comment while you live in Australia in a place that actually does appear to care about things like COVID-19.
But once theyâre ON RECORD we can
Are you applauding PC for focusing on something that wonât save lives in the short-term but criticizing other people for focusing on something that you say wonât save lives in the short-term?
1 Like
Iâm talking about doing something without knowing the long term outcome, while for sure knowing the short term outcome.
You and your dumb marshmallow test need to look at it another way. Instead of getting 2 later by delaying gratification today, you get 0 later and 0 with delay today. No one ever seems to be thinking that when hashing out these scenarios despite all of the talk here being that weâre going to lose to the point of trying to self-fulfill it.
Boy, oh boy, itâs almost like thereâs an election coming right up where having these votes on the record actually means something. Who knew?