Democrats have all the spontaneity of the House of Windsor. Or, closer to home, they’re closer to what Republicans once were, a party that falls in line not in love.
Democrats have all the spontaneity of the House of Windsor. Or, closer to home, they’re closer to what Republicans once were, a party that falls in line not in love.
I read this as saying if you can’t build an electoral apparatus within the Democrat party capable of challenging the party leaders, your opinion doesn’t matter to the democrats
If you’re not a Republican, your opinion doesn’t matter to the Democrats.
10/10
I love this “it’s not worth trying” attitude as an excuse to complain.
Weirdly, I haven’t heard anyone who was pushing for Dean Phillips or Marianne Williamson make that claim or that complaint. Maybe because they actually did the work.
>I love this “it’s not worth trying” attitude as an excuse to complain.
that’s not what I said. it’s a strawman.
Yes, I know your ‘if I don’t literally say something, any inference you make is false’ game. You played it yesterday too.
And, of course, you’re allowed to interpret what I say however you like.
it’s not a game. it’s just intellectual honesty
I see. The idea that you can interpret my comment any way you like but I are not allowed to interpret any of your comments except 100% literally is intellectual honesty to you.
Interesting.
I explained my interpretation. you lampooned me using quotes. it’s just a matter of intellectually honest engagement.
Wouldn’t the intellectually honest thing be to ask me what I meant rather than decide your interpretation was correct?
if it’s not, then you could correct it. what you did was argue with a strawman.