254
submitted 5 months ago by MyEdgyAlt@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

How does it not fit that narrative? If everyone canvassed for another candidate, there might have been a legitimate primary challenge. But almost all the people who complained about Biden didn't do that. So asking who their preferred candidate was and asking them why they didn't canvass for them seems apt to me.

[-] upto60percentoff@kbin.run -1 points 4 months ago

Ignoring that asking about canvassing isn't all you did, expecting people to canvas to have an opinion on politics is so nonsensical it actually brings us full circle to the deliberately ridiculous original comment I left.

How is expecting people to canvas before having an opinion any better than expecting people to donate? It reeks of elitism.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

What? Canvass before having an opinion? It had been three years into Biden's presidency when the election year started. People didn't have an opinion of whether or not he should run or who else should be president by then?

You're right, I don't expect them to canvass. They clearly are very politically unaware.

[-] upto60percentoff@kbin.run -1 points 4 months ago

You're really doubling down at every opportunity?

How is expecting people to canvas before having an opinion more justifiable than expecting them to donate before having one?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Again- why did they not have an opinion after three years of Biden's presidency?

[-] upto60percentoff@kbin.run 1 points 4 months ago

The point being that you went from not believing anybody else could do the job to believing in Harris because it turns out that if somebody isn't campaigning then they don't seem a viable candidate?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Never said no one else could do the job. Why are you lying?

I said no one did any major canvassing for anyone else. I said it to you again in this conversation. That's a simple fact. I'm sorry you don't like facts so much that you have to lie.

Also, candidates don't win primaries by magic. You have to get people to vote for them. That involves canvassing. Either you're incredibly ignorant about the electoral process or you're trolling. The lie makes me think the latter.

[-] upto60percentoff@kbin.run 1 points 4 months ago

If you pointedly and repeatedly demand which alternate candidate somebody canvassed for, then one of three things is true:

  • You don't think an alternate candidate exists
  • You think somebody needs to canvas to hold an opinion
  • You think there is an alternate candidate, but are just being difficult for the sake of it

Why bother pretending otherwise?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

If you pointedly and repeatedly demand which alternate candidate somebody canvassed for

This is a lie, I ask. I do not demand. After two lies, and that is the second, I don't bother reading further. The rest of your comment was a waste of your time.

[-] upto60percentoff@kbin.run 1 points 4 months ago

I'm trying to figure out if you've convinced yourself of this or if you're just trying to avoid appearing wrong on the internet. Utterly fascinating.

For reference, demand would very obviously be a synonym of ask in this case.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

And now you're doubling down on your lie, so we're done here.

this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
254 points (95.0% liked)

News

23626 readers
2756 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS