What strategy should Democrats use moving forward?

[CriticalCheeze]

You are a great source of information today. I feel like I should send you a gift wrapped turd or something.

What more do you need of an OPINION? It tastes like shit, yields usually are not that great from the growers i have seen growing them. State licensed growers. Potency is sub-par.

No, i want no gifts from the likes of a pedophile.

 

[UncleBuck]

Well, I did say "generally" didn't I, Poopy Pants ?

10+ pages on one insult alone shows you generally do, pedophile.

 

[Rob Roy]

Pedophiles have weak arguments also, even more say to add holocaust denial into the mix.
shut the fuck up

 

[Rob Roy]

10+ pages on one insult alone shows you generally do, pedophile.

I'm sorry to have hurt you so deeply. Would you like me to address you another way ?

 

[UncleBuck]

I'm sorry to have hurt you so deeply. Would you like me to address you another way ?

why do you think 12 year old children can consent?

 

[Rob Roy]

why do you think 12 year old children can consent?

If you oppose nonconsensual conduct between people, I commend you. But you really don't disapprove of that behavior. It's easy to prove you don't...

Why do you think some people can give another persons consent ? Why do you approve of nonconsensual interactions between people ? See? Now you've lost again.

 

[UncleBuck]

If you oppose nonconsensual conduct between people, I commend you. But you really don't disapprove of that behavior. It's easy to prove you don't...

Why do you think some people can give another persons consent ? Why do you approve of nonconsensual interactions between people ? See? Now you've lost again.

you didn't answer, like usual.

why do you think 12 year old children can consent, pedophile?

 

[CriticalCheeze]

If you oppose nonconsensual conduct between people, I commend you. But you really don't disapprove of that behavior. It's easy to prove you don't...

Why do you think some people can give another persons consent ? Why do you approve of nonconsensual interactions between people ? See? Now you've lost again.

shut the fuck up. sick pervert.

 

[ttystikk]

What rights are men being denied, in your estimation? Why is a men's rights movement necessary? How is the man being kept down, if you will? Pada? Yeah, that nut would be a men's rights activist. But you? That actually surprises me a bit. We'll see your answers to these questions and go from there. Pada? He is one of two people in my ignore list now. He and sixstring2112. Nice pair. His drivel is not worth reading and he's a coward. I anxiously await your answers.

You sound as if having rights is a zero sum game; individuals or groups get them at the expense of others. This is not so.

Do men's groups have to be comprised of white men? What if they're not? Or mixed?

As far as rights bring denied, I don't think there's much doubt about that; men and women of all ethnicities have been watching their civil rights be chipped away, ignored and outright violated.

Less affluent and less white men have certainly had it worse but it's an across the board phenomenon. Why do you think it's not okay for men, white or any other color, to organize to fight for their rights? Where do YOU get off deriding the idea?

 

[UncleBuck]

Why do you think it's not okay for men, white or any other color, to organize to fight for their rights?

lol, that should be the message going forward.

"men have had it too hard for too long and we're not gonna take it anymore! men demand equal rights!"

 

[_gresh_]

 

[ttystikk]

View attachment 3987301

Ah, so you think men don't need to have rights.

Got it.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Where do YOU get off deriding the idea?

It's a continuation of their main tactic. They can't argue policy positions so they distract the narrative with identity attacks. At this point, it's all but transparent.

Watch what happens any time anyone brings up a policy position; they immediately obfuscate with the same identity attacks. This is a carefully designed tactic of diversion focused on and hoping to elicit an emotional reaction.

They can't argue policy because they know they're wrong when it comes to policy. So they do everything they can to avoid talking about policy.

 

[dagwood45431]

Why do you think it's not okay for men, white or any other color, to organize to fight for their rights? Where do YOU get off deriding the idea?

You did not answer any of my questions. Try again?

 

[dagwood45431]

lol, that should be the message going forward.

"men have had it too hard for too long and we're not gonna take it anymore! men demand equal rights!"

SMH. The stupidity of arguing for the need of a men's rights movement is stunning actually. These people call themselves progressives? That's fucking adorable!

 

[ttystikk]

You did not answer any of my questions. Try again?

You're asking all the wrong ones. If men want to organize and speak out for their rights, what skin is it off your nose? I'm not aware of any constitutional clause requiring that the organization of free people be demonstrably downtrodden first.

 

[ttystikk]

SMH. The stupidity of arguing for the need of a men's rights movement is stunning actually. These people call themselves progressives? That's fucking adorable!

I didn't say anything about need. I didn't say I'd join it. But I'm not going to ridicule it.

Why does the idea threaten you?

 

[dagwood45431]

You sound as if having rights is a zero sum game; individuals or groups get them at the expense of others. This is not so.

Do men's groups have to be comprised of white men? What if they're not? Or mixed?

As far as rights bring denied, I don't think there's much doubt about that; men and women of all ethnicities have been watching their civil rights be chipped away, ignored and outright violated.

Less affluent and less white men have certainly had it worse but it's an across the board phenomenon. Why do you think it's not okay for men, white or any other color, to organize to fight for their rights? Where do YOU get off deriding the idea?

By the way, your aversion to HRC is clouded to some degree by misogyny. That is VERY clear at this point. Pada? That shithead is misogynistic at his core. There is no room for misogyny in the progressive movement. You both are frauds.

 

[dagwood45431]

I didn't say anything about need. I didn't say I'd join it. But I'm not going to ridicule it.

Why does the idea threaten you?

It doesn't threaten me at all. It's disgusts me. Ponder the difference.

 

[ttystikk]

By the way, your aversion to HRC is clouded to some degree by misogyny. That is VERY clear at this point. Pada? That shithead is misogynistic at his core. There is no room for misogyny in the progressive movement. You both are frauds.

Your argument is without merit, it's off the subject and if it's the best you can come up with in response, just give it up already.

You don't have any ideas about the original thread topic, yet you think this kind of drivel is a valuable use of your time?

Democrats need to listen to their constituents and lose the superdelegate vote rigging scheme.

THAT'S called 'policy'. What policy changes would you like to see the Democratic Party make, or are vapid identity attacks the best you can manage?