Jump to content

GW Hayduke

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1702
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GW Hayduke

  1. I lied - one last point is that there aren’t just two sides to the trumpist style attack based politics issue. And this is critical. The third side includes White House press briefings that address problems and policies rather than the “others.” That side includes a Biden team hitting the circuit making the case for policies and not against “others.” Hopefully that means a legislative branch passing meaningful laws. That is the side I am contrasting against AOC’s method and resulting tribalism. I get that the context contributed to some of the excessive emotions, strawmen, and labeling. I think it has more to do with tribal instincts - I called it worshiping but maybe people felt that is a loaded term
  2. Are you serious? What serious comment have I not responded to? My position from the beginning is that the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style politics that is based on tribalism and attacking the “others” and that that type of politics has costs. Different folks introduced their own qualifications. As I have stated, I don’t disagree with any of them. I was initially labeled as an other or trumpkin by multiple posters - evidence in my mind of the tribalism that surrounds AOC. Bernie had it too. I’ll leave it at that and stop responding since the mods seem to have an issue with something
  3. Don’t let brisket know that she attacks unprovoked. I agree Schiff was an attack dog during the first impeachment. Lieu is rather similar to AOC in my opinion as they both seem to operate heavily through twitter.
  4. So you agree they are both attack dogs for their side. That is the point. Your qualification is that they have different method of attacking the other side. I’m not arguing against that, just like I’m not arguing against brisket’s qualification that her attacks are only “defensive.”
  5. Yes. It is my fault you didn't understand the sentence. I'll do better next time. I never said any of that. Reading is hard.
  6. No need to strawman bro. We can have an adult discussion. Policies and method of politik are not the same. My sentence was "the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style of politics by the left...." The rest of the sentence was an accurate an accurate description of trumpism, IMO. My position is that they are both attack dogs for their side. That doesn't mean they are equivalent - but equivalent in that role and how they fit in the current game of trumpian attack-style politics. Are they each more than that? Sure. Of course. Some were upset with the use of attack dog and brisket prefers a shepherd with other qualifiers.
  7. I mean, you've got brisket on here promoting the use of attack-based politics - since that is what the other side does and (per him) that it is needed in order to win - as long we qualify that those attacks are actually defensive (per him). You should look closely at what he is saying and then look closely at what I am saying.
  8. And those two sentences are not in conflict.
  9. You've already made it clear that those qualifications are very very important to you. That doesn't mean they are relevant to my position. Are you arguing against the position that Cruz and AOC are the exact same? Are you arguing for the position that AOC is an attack dog but that she is justified in being one? Are you arguing against the position that AOC and Gym Jordan are both attack dogs for their side, except one of them is justified in that method of politik and is actually a shepherd?
  10. I understand the concept of counter attack. It just isn't relevant unless someone is overly sensitive about discussions about their tribe and wants to haggle. No one said she wasn't serious about policy. Again, policies and method of politik are not the same.
  11. First you haggle over "counter" and now "for." You can do better. You are for attack-based politics. You are for them because the other side uses them and because you say they are needed in order to win. Meet force with force. That is ok. You are for AOC being the attack dog - as long as that label expands to include "counter-attack dog that is only aggressive because it was provoked." None of your qualifications matter to my position. You are just playing a game with yourself.
  12. 2001 is when the stark separation occurs in the video.
  13. Look. You are on the side of attack-based politics. You have said so much. That is fine. Why the emotional reaction to describing AOC in those terms? Why the immediate reaction of labeling me, someone describing the situation (which you agree with), as a trump supporter or the other side or whatever? Your position is that we should use attack-based politics, but we shouldn't label attack dogs and then mix in a heavy helping of strawmen on top. The side that has used division based politics as their entire platform is currently sitting on the side lines, btw. It was effective for them - until it wasn't. I'm not denying that is has worked for them in the past. Is this a strawman or is categorization hard for you? https://www.pinterest.com/pin/553661347920903881/
  14. Sure man. That's exactly my position. But really, here it is, again.
  15. Sure mate. https://www.reddit.com/r/MurderedByAOC/ https://www.c-span.org/video/?508460-1/white-house-press-secretary-holds-briefing https://www.c-span.org/video/?508410-1/house-budget-resolution-week-speaker-pelosi
  16. Really? You think the semantics of counter attack dog vs attack dog is the real issue here? The other side praises Gym Jordan for not being a push over. The other side praised trump cause he was a fighter - or maybe it was a counter fighter. That side is now sitting on the sidelines. We now have mature people in charge doing mature things. They are having adult-based discussions with the daily white house briefings. His team have been making the rounds using sensible policy/value based rhetoric. We need more and more of that shit. Attack dogs, uhhhh counter-attach dogs, have their role. They may or may not be effective, but they have a role. Gym Jordan and Fox News think they are effective I'm sure. Again, describing AOC's politik isn't disrespectful. She understand how to fight the battle but she isn't an attack dog? Should we use the label of "attack bull?"
  17. It isn't disrespectful to point out her role as the attack dog for the left. It isn't disrespectful to point out that twitter clap backs and attack-based tribal politics turn folks off. Her policies and her method of politik are not the same. It is possible to critique one while supporting left policies. Listen you snot-nose little shit, I was takin' shrapnel in Khe Sanh when you were crappin' in your hands and rubbin' it on your face.
  18. Fuck you, pussy. For some reason you aren't able to contribute except for random worthless dribble. Share a position. Contribute. Or shut the fuck up, pussy. I get that your brain might have melted by a constant stream of tribal dribble, but at least you can shut the fuck up, pussy. No one is saying to work with fascists. The two options are not "work with fascists" or "worship AOC."
  19. This is full tilt tribe-based politics up in here. Any thought or idea about method of politik shall be shouted down. It is all about sides here, seemingly
  20. No. I am the guy saying we shouldn't admire burning buildings and blood. I'm not the guy saying AOC is bad, AOC is the same as Gym, or that Gym is better. I'm the guy saying they are both attack dogs for their side. I'm the guy saying that her serving that role hurts her as a politician when it comes to those on the left that are tired of tribalism. Maybe you aren't tired of tribalism, but instead have embraced it. It is probably good to understand that. She has talent. That was a good moment for her, but everyone has their moments. You should watch more CSPAN. My position isn't that she isn't talented or that she doesn't support good policies. Compare AOC's twitter to Pelosi's. And to Biden. Observe that their accounts are a reflection of their roles. One role is that of an attack dog - or bull - or whatever you want to call it. Giving her an accurate label isn't an attack. Understanding her role shouldn't trigger, just as understanding that some folks are burnt out on tribalism shouldn't trigger.
  21. You guys need to wind down the tribalism. Anyone that accurately describes AOC's politik is labeled the "others." That's rather crazy. Attack dogs have a purpose in politics. They may or may not turn out the vote, but I personally think they suck. They suck when Gym Jordan screams in a committee hearing. They suck when POTUS was an attack dog - Trump tweeting bullshit hourly from the oval office. They suck when AOC clap backs on twitter. It sucks even more when folks equate that to making someone a great politician.
  22. Fuck you, pussy. You guys are a piece of work. I didn't do shit and am not a GOP supporter and never have been. Fuck you again.
  23. Who are "the people?" Are you equating anyone who doesn't feel like twitter clap-backs should be the end-all, be-all of our elected officials as a hypocritical trumpkin or the GOP? I've never voted for a single republican in my entire life dip shit. I recommend you reflect on why you decided to place a label on me. Just because I don't respect twitter clap backs doesn't mean I'm on the team.
  24. The right will always have their boogeymen. That isn't AOC's problem. Her issue is that she has embraced the role of being the attack dog for the left. Her method is division, confrontation, and twitter clap-backs. Folks are tired of twitter clap-backs and tribalism. I'm not saying the left shouldn't have attack dogs. The right has them in the Gym Jordan's and Tucker Carlson's of the world. Attack dogs have their purpose and it is possible they have a positive influence on meaningful things. Folks are just tired of divisive politics. We all lived through Trump. The worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style politics by the left - the style of attacking the "others" rather than solving problems, passing legislation, and promotion of policies, ideas, values - the things that we should admire in our elected representatives - not twitter clap-backs.
  25. It must be an intimidating force of small game to need a semi-auto with 18 rounds. Hopefully any permit system would accommodate your need
×
×
  • Create New...