I can’t wait for Democrats to accuse one of their own of being a Russian asset.

6 points

Well, that’s quite shocking. Who could have expected her to not endorse someone who supports the ethnic cleansing of her ethnicity?

permalink
report
reply
5 points

People need to remember that Rashiba Tlaib is Palestinian-American.

This is not some just some overseas event, but rather a severe personal grievance. It’s difficult to imagine a more pressing issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

They know. They just don’t care. They would rather have the attitude of “What are your choices? Vote for us even as we kill your people” rather than try to understand where she’s coming from.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

These are the poll options in Indiana. No write-ins. Write-ins have to fill out a form to declare it. There was no space to write in a candidate.

I would like to know who Rashida Tlaib thinks Hoosiers should vote for:

(I’m enjoying asking this of people who think it shouldn’t be Harris and not getting an answer.)

permalink
report
reply
13 points

OP will engage in a ten hour discussion in the bad comments replying within seconds every time and not do one multiple choice question

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I wouldn’t be surprised if OP has blocked this user. A lot of people have or just avoid engaging this person. Unpleasant interactions with this user is a known thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

OP either has squid blocked or is avoiding him. A quick glance at modlogs cleared up the why for me lol.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

You’re probably right that OP has blocked this person (every sane comment has downvotes except in this chain!), but “unpleasant interactions?” I’m having unpleasant interactions with OP right now (I have put it on hold until they solve the multiple choice question above, though) and that individual sure can’t stop posting. Since I remain clearly unblocked, I have to conclude that OP blocked this person for some reason other than “unpleasant interactions.” Anyway if OP is curious about stuff they can’t see due to choosing to not see it, OP can log out of the account that’s choosing to not see the stuff.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

I don’t think not endorsing is the same as saying vote for someone else. I won’t endorse McDonald’s but if I’m starving with no other option I would have to eat it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

There certainly are plenty of people here on Lemmy saying not to vote for her.

And so far not telling me who I should have voted for given my options.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Absolutely! I don’t think that is necessarily implied by not endorsing, that’s all

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

She flat out told people to vote straight ticket Democrat in this very speech.

This article is just an attempt at ratfucking because she didn’t explicitly say she was specifically endorsing Harris.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

there’s a typical sneaky bullshitter strategy that sneaky bullshitters always use (i am using “bullshit” according to the wikipedia definition so it is civility, there’s no other way to communicate the idea). the strat is this: sneak an assumption in and treat it as a fact. then, start an argument about an unrelated thing. nobody argues about the assumption. kapow! the sneaky bullshitter has just sneakily pushed a bullshit idea and gotten away with it. can you find the assumption, internet posters?

permalink
report
reply
-5 points

Are you calling me sneaky?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

look no offense but I’m speaking to the people you’re attempting to influence (mods removed a slightly different phrasing of this for civility reasons, let’s see if removing a key phrase is good enough)

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

If you think I have snuck in an unwarranted assumption, you should say what you think that is. Surely it would be to the benefit of the people you are speaking to.

(Or are you just broadly casting aspersions that you can’t substantiate?)

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

It’s called “presupposing a frame”, and Innuendo Studios did a really good piece about it here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

I’m familiar with what that is. I just don’t think I’m doing that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I didn’t say you are, nor was I responding to you. I was giving them the term they were trying to define.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Are you saying you don’t think Rashida Tlaib is one of the Democratic party’s own? Or that disinformation from the Russian government is real? Because I strongly disagree with the first one but strongly agree with the latter.

Side note: rhetorical questions are frequently very unhelpful for forthright communication.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Since this is down in the bad comments zone and my attempt at getting people to play “find the assumption” has failed I’m gonna just answer this (also I looked at your post history and you seem to be a real human). “I can’t wait for Democrats to accuse one of their own of being a Russian asset.” “Democrats to accuse one of their own of being a Russian asset.” “Democrats” “If you can solve the multiple choice question of which of the four candidates to vote for, you are a centrist/liberal (in the leftist sense)/duopoly/two-sides-of-the-same-coin-boi. No leftist/proper radical/cool tough guy who is very cool and tough like me would ever accuse Tlaib of being a Russian asset, so if you do, I am drawing myself as the Chad Leftist and you as the Soyjack Centrist” It’s the kind of openly silly opinion that, if you say it openly, people laugh at you, so OP simply assumes it and attempt to change the subject before anyone notices, thus normalizing it. A person not pushing an agenda who writes like a normal person would probably say “I can’t wait for you dumbdumbs/Lemmy to accuse Tlaib of being a Russian asset” or more likely just not bring it up at all. People are gonna accuse me of being silly but there’s simply no reason to bring it up and phrase it that way unless that’s what you’re attempting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Ok, if I’m interpreting you correctly, you’re saying it would be absurd to call Tlaib a Russian asset, but no one has actually done that, and OP’s preemptive accusation that Democratic party spokespeople and/or us dumbdumbs will say that is a concealed and unfounded accusation? Because that I think I agree with (at least the unfounded part, I don’t know if there was intent to conceal or if this was just a clumsy but good faith effort at expressing an opinion you and I disagree with).

On the other hand, if you’re calling a Palestinian American lawmaker a Russian asset (e.g. unAmerican, fifth columnist, etc., which is all xenophobic John Bircher crap I’ve got no patience for) I’ve got a really strong disagreement with you, but it seems like that is the opposite of what you’re saying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

"[…] No leftist/proper radical/cool tough guy who is very cool and tough like me would ever accuse Tlaib of being a Russian asset, so if you do, I am drawing myself as the Chad Leftist and you as the Soyjack Centrist” It’s the kind of openly silly opinion that, if you say it openly, people laugh at you, so OP simply assumes it

Are you saying that I’m (sneakily) assuming that’s it’s ridiculous to accuse Tlaib of being a Russian asset? (I’m not trying to paraphrase you, I’m just genuinely not exactly sure of what you’re saying.)

I do believe it would be ridiculous to accuse Tlaib of being a Russian asset. I am not being sneaky about that. I will openly say it. Here, listen to me say it:

No leftist/proper radical/cool tough guy who is very cool and tough like me would ever accuse Tlaib of being a Russian asset.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I can’t wait for Democrats to accuse one of their own of being a Russian asset.

Why would they?

permalink
report
reply
-24 points

Because their strategy for responding to any criticism of Harris, Biden, or the Democrats is to accuse the critic of being a Russian asset.

I imagine right now they’re debating about whether they can credibly accuse of Rashida Tlaib of being a Russian asset without it backfiring on them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I haven’t seen that response unless someone has credible connections to Russia, like Trump or Stein.

Also, her complaints are 100% valid.

Ironically you’re the one dismissing criticism of people supporting Russian interests in a completely unrelated post.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

OP is also pushing the assumption: “Everyone is either 100% paid by Putin directly, or 100% totally fine.” This is a bad assumption. It’s totally fine to say “I, an internet poster, have no idea as to how many handshakes away from Putin this person is. They could be paid, or paid by a surrogate, or ten degrees of that, or they could have been fooled into sincerely believing RT talking points. However, their behavior and statements are useful idiot behavior and useful idiot statements, and I’m judging them appropriately.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points
*

I haven’t seen that response unless someone has credible connections to Russia, like Trump or Stein.

I’ve seen people on Lemmy suggest that the Pope is a Russian asset.

https://lemmy.world/comment/12053409

Also, I’ve been called a Russian asset plenty of times, and I’m even banned from some subs for supposedly being a Russian asset, and I have no connections to Russia at all. I’ve never been to Russia, I have no family from Russia, and I don’t speak Russian.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

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.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 8.9K

    Posts

  • 162K

    Comments