Then engage with the discussion??? It’s very frustrating reading your comments actively shutting down discourse.
Here I’ll do it for you:
I disagree with @opinionhaver because I think that filling stadiums in red and swing states is a tangible metric that is at least correlated with general election support. I think that Trump is even more polarizing than AOC, and so her polarization isn’t as much of an issue as they make it out to be.
There. Now we find out how substantial their position is when they defend it, instead of just crying about talking points
Repeating incorrect and intentionally obtuse cable news talking points is more disingenuous and misleading than anything I’ve posted. Hate to break it to ya
I’m not going to engage with lies especially when the commenters don’t even realize they are lying by repeating the cable news talking points
So… no… I’m not going to do as you suggest because I refute your narrative and fraiming
If they are incorrect, lying, and don’t realize it, but still arguing in good faith, then their arguments will fall short when challenged. If they are arguing in bad faith, then it’s a different story.
I’ll admit the claims they made are perhaps overly broad and difficult to challenge, but it is entirely within the realm of possibility that they can back it up with examples / evidence.
Jumping straight to calling them out is pretty disingenuous. Even if their points are more disingenuous and misleading, you shouldn’t be fighting fallacy with another fallacy.
Then engage with the discussion??? It’s very frustrating reading your comments actively shutting down discourse.
Here I’ll do it for you: I disagree with @opinionhaver because I think that filling stadiums in red and swing states is a tangible metric that is at least correlated with general election support. I think that Trump is even more polarizing than AOC, and so her polarization isn’t as much of an issue as they make it out to be.
There. Now we find out how substantial their position is when they defend it, instead of just crying about talking points
Repeating incorrect and intentionally obtuse cable news talking points is more disingenuous and misleading than anything I’ve posted. Hate to break it to ya
I’m not going to engage with lies especially when the commenters don’t even realize they are lying by repeating the cable news talking points
So… no… I’m not going to do as you suggest because I refute your narrative and fraiming
If they are incorrect, lying, and don’t realize it, but still arguing in good faith, then their arguments will fall short when challenged. If they are arguing in bad faith, then it’s a different story.
I’ll admit the claims they made are perhaps overly broad and difficult to challenge, but it is entirely within the realm of possibility that they can back it up with examples / evidence.
Jumping straight to calling them out is pretty disingenuous. Even if their points are more disingenuous and misleading, you shouldn’t be fighting fallacy with another fallacy.
Are you suggesting that mass media is unintentionally lying to the public to unintentionally support a corporate narrative? You are very funny.
I have not once mentioned the media in my comments. Please do not misunderstand. They all were pertaining to your and @opinionhaver’s interaction