Enjoy the moment that broke Laura Ingraham...

[XponentialChaos]

…we all understand that you believe all GOP candidates are shit…

You didn’t think Cheney was shit, which just proved my point.

You don’t see how you contradicted yourself here?

Maybe you really do have dementia.

 

[XponentialChaos]

There was no reason for you to say that Ray was an uneducated truck driver…

His statement: “You're kinda slow, aren't cha?”

My response: “I know you’re just an uneducated truck driver but it’s not that difficult.”

I respond in kind.

Somehow you think his statement is fine but mine isn’t. Maybe it’s because you’re a hypocrite piece of shit. (Responding in kind again.)

 

[j-mac]

What was I dishonest about? What did I misrepresent?

I’ve noticed that you guys are absolutely terrible at providing specific details for your claims. You guys make vague statements and then run off the moment anyone pushes back on your vague statements. Look at Ray, he did exactly that. Again.

Here is what he said: “My belief is I don't know if the election was stolen or not. Before I take a stance on anything, I have to see irrefutable evidence of something.”

What have I been dishonest about?

The tactic of using him to sway my opinion is a dishonest act…As well as a bit of a logical fallacy….Ray has his opinions, and I have mine.

 

[OldFlame]

I disagree with a lot of his positions but he seems very reasonable, articulates his points well, and isn’t afraid of calling out the crazy idiots on his side of the aisle.

Care to admit that you’re a liar now?

You make no sense, he has zero political experience. Wasn’t the bar you were using throughout this whole thread?

And yes, he’s a rino, so it doesn’t surprise me that you like him. But if he ran on a bigger ticket, you’d be attacking him.

 

[OldFlame]

His statement: “You're kinda slow, aren't cha?”

My response: “I know you’re just an uneducated truck driver but it’s not that difficult.”

I respond in kind.

Somehow you think his statement is fine but mine isn’t. Maybe it’s because you’re a hypocrite piece of shit. (Responding in kind again.)

Your statement was attacking him personally, shows what you lefties really think of hard working blue collar workers. And you were doing it throughout the entire thread, that he would finally respond in kind shouldn’t be a surprise.

 

[OldFlame]

The tactic of using him to sway my opinion is a dishonest act…As well as a bit of a logical fallacy….Ray has his opinions, and I have mine.

They don’t understand the concept of individualism, all they know is group think. They think and say what they’re told to think and say by their ‘betters’.

 

[XponentialChaos]

The tactic of using him to sway my opinion is a dishonest act…As well as a bit of a logical fallacy….Ray has his opinions, and I have mine.

I don’t expect anyone to sway their opinions. I’m just showing you that even people on your side don’t find the evidence convincing.

That’s not dishonest. That’s a fact. You just don’t like it.

 

[XponentialChaos]

You make no sense, he has zero political experience. Wasn’t the bar you were using throughout this whole thread?

That’s a factor to consider. It’s not THE only factor.

So you got caught in a lie and can’t admit that you lied. Very expected when you’re a lying piece of shit.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Your statement was attacking him personally, shows what you lefties really think of hard working blue collar workers.

He attacked me personally. I responded in kind.

If you weren’t such a hypocrite piece of shit, you would realize how stupid you sound for trying to justify one action while condemning the other.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Your statement was attacking him personally, shows what you lefties really think of hard working blue collar workers. And you were doing it throughout the entire thread, that he would finally respond in kind shouldn’t be a surprise.

Which is another reason I avoid talking to him. I actually think he's a high school kid or something. He's here day and night, doesn't seem to have a job, and insults people that worked all their life.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Believe it or not, but I’m actually in agreement with Ray on what he was saying before this turned into a shit-flinging contest.

The evidence for the stolen election is underwhelming and not convincing whatsoever.

Even people with very little intelligence can sometimes display surprising levels of appropriate skepticism.

 

[j-mac]

I don’t expect anyone to sway their opinions. I’m just showing you that even people on your side don’t find the evidence convincing.

That’s not dishonest. That’s a fact. You just don’t like it.

So, what’s your goal in using Ray‘s opinion? Am I supposed to say ‘Ah well, as long as Ray says so’?

 

[miketx]

Sir ,my OP was who's to blame, as in most responsible for this colossal loss.

Are you sticking w/the Republican Senators?

Racist liar pos sez what?

 

[XponentialChaos]

So, what’s your goal in using Ray‘s opinion? Am I supposed to say ‘Ah well, as long as Ray says so’?

I already answered that. My goal is to show you that even people on your side don’t find the evidence convincing.

If you think your evidence is convincing when you can’t even convince your own people, then you clearly have an issue with your reasoning. Whether you see that or not isn’t my problem.

I’m just stating a fact. There’s nothing dishonest about it just because you don’t like it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So, what’s your goal in using Ray‘s opinion? Am I supposed to say ‘Ah well, as long as Ray says so’?

Just trying to start conflict. He's a commie, so he doesn't understand that we on the right are individual thinkers. In his party, everybody thinks the same or out you go. Whatever CNN tells you to think, that's the way you're going to think.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I’m simply showing that even conservative Trumpsters don’t see the evidence for the stolen election.

If you can’t convince your own people that the evidence is “obvious”, then you sure as hell won’t be able to convince people on the other side of the aisle of your bullshit conspiracy theories.

It’s not that complicated.

 

[j-mac]

I already answered that. My goal is to show you that even people on your side don’t find the evidence convincing.

If you think your evidence is convincing when you can’t even convince your own people, then you clearly have an issue with your reasoning. Whether you see that or not isn’t my problem.

I’m just stating a fact. There’s nothing dishonest about it just because you don’t like it.

I’d wager Ray and I are closer in our final conclusion than you and I. But it’s cute you think I have to convince you of anything…I gave up trying to convince those not open to free thought long ago.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I’d wager Ray and I are closer in our final conclusion than you and I.

On the election being stolen? Clearly not. You believe that the evidence for the stolen election is obvious. Ray and I agree that your evidence is underwhelming and not convincing whatsoever.

Here are his words.

“My belief is I don't know if the election was stolen or not. Before I take a stance on anything, I have to see irrefutable evidence of something.”

 

[j-mac]

On the election being stolen? Clearly not. You believe that the evidence for the stolen election is obvious. Ray and I agree that your evidence is underwhelming and not convincing whatsoever.

Here are his words.

“My belief is I don't know if the election was stolen or not. Before I take a stance on anything, I have to see irrefutable evidence of something.”

Yeah well, you’re going to believe what you want to believe I guess…you do you…

 

[XponentialChaos]

Yeah well, you’re going to believe what you want to believe I guess…you do you…

I’ll believe what is clearly true because of what he said.

“My belief is I don't know if the election was stolen or not. Before I take a stance on anything, I have to see irrefutable evidence of something.”

We both find your evidence underwhelming and unconvincing.

What part of that are you having a hard time with? I know it’s hard to believe, but sometimes even me and Ray can agree on something.