Election Delays and Covid

[Elixir]

I have been told ...

I don't think anyone here is going to dispute a statement that starts that way, especially coming from you.
After gleaning the nature of some things you've been told, there is little that would surprise.
Are you still thinking that there is some threshold of electoral defeat that would cause Trump to concede a lost election?
Wanna venture a guess at where that threshold might lie?

 

[Shadowy Man]

So your arguments is that because they have major details in common, while dogs and cats have minor details in common, therefore major details are actually minor details?

I’m sorry. Was my argument too nuanced?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So your arguments is that because they have major details in common, while dogs and cats have minor details in common, therefore major details are actually minor details?

I’m sorry. Was my argument too nuanced?

No, Jason is just like that.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So your arguments is that because they have major details in common, while dogs and cats have minor details in common, therefore major details are actually minor details?

I’m sorry. Was my argument too nuanced?

I pointed out major features in common. Your reply was "these have minor features in common, therefore they are just as much the same."

That's not nuance, that red herring.

 

[Shadowy Man]

So your arguments is that because they have major details in common, while dogs and cats have minor details in common, therefore major details are actually minor details?

I’m sorry. Was my argument too nuanced?

I pointed out major features in common. Your reply was "these have minor features in common, therefore they are just as much the same."

That's not nuance, that red herring.

Pointing out major features in common and then assuming all must be common is as fallacious as pointing out minor things in common and assuming all must be common.

But Your argument lacked the nuance to show the difference between the USA and NZ situations.

I will admit It was more eloquently pointed out by another poster shortly after my terse quip.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I pointed out major features in common. Your reply was "these have minor features in common, therefore they are just as much the same."

That's not nuance, that red herring.

Pointing out major features in common and then assuming all must be common is as fallacious as pointing out minor things in common and assuming all must be common.

Actually no. Major features in common show far more in common than minor features in common.

Never mind though, we've discovered the definitional barriers. If you contemplate delaying an election, that's fascism. Actually doing it, that's not fascism.

 

[laughing dog]

I pointed out major features in common. Your reply was "these have minor features in common, therefore they are just as much the same."

That's not nuance, that red herring.

Pointing out major features in common and then assuming all must be common is as fallacious as pointing out minor things in common and assuming all must be common.

Actually no. Major features in common show far more in common than minor features in common.

Never mind though, we've discovered the definitional barriers. If you contemplate delaying an election, that's fascism. Actually doing it, that's not fascism.

Wow - using the royal "we" because no one else here is buying your ludicrous argument. For some reason, you are unable to grasp the concept that PM of New Zealand has the legal authority to establish election dates within limits while the US President does not. Which means that Mr. Trump is seeking to illegally delay the election while the PM of New Zealand is not seeking to act illegally. Hence the allegation of fascism against Mr. Trump has some merit but no merit against the PM of New Zealand.

 

[Patooka]

Actually no. Major features in common show far more in common than minor features in common.

Never mind though, we've discovered the definitional barriers. If you contemplate delaying an election, that's fascism. Actually doing it, that's not fascism.

Wow - using the royal "we" because no one else here is buying your ludicrous argument. For some reason, you are unable to grasp the concept that PM of New Zealand has the legal authority to establish election dates within limits while the US President does not. Which means that Mr. Trump is seeking to illegally delay the election while the PM of New Zealand is not seeking to act illegally. Hence the allegation of fascism against Mr. Trump has some merit but no merit against the PM of New Zealand.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING? DON'T YOU DARE INJECT NUANCE IN AN ARGUMENT WITH A LIBERTARIAN!

 

[Shadowy Man]

Actually no. Major features in common show far more in common than minor features in common.

Never mind though, we've discovered the definitional barriers. If you contemplate delaying an election, that's fascism. Actually doing it, that's not fascism.

Wow - using the royal "we" because no one else here is buying your ludicrous argument. For some reason, you are unable to grasp the concept that PM of New Zealand has the legal authority to establish election dates within limits while the US President does not. Which means that Mr. Trump is seeking to illegally delay the election while the PM of New Zealand is not seeking to act illegally. Hence the allegation of fascism against Mr. Trump has some merit but no merit against the PM of New Zealand.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING? DON'T YOU DARE INJECT NUANCE IN AN ARGUMENT WITH A LIBERTARIAN!

Using Jason’s parlance that’s major things not in common, rather than nuance. I would say the constitutions of the respective countries to be major things when speaking about the legal power invested in the constitutionally defined political entities.

And by the way dogs and cats have a lot more in common than just tails. Even major things in common.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Actually no. Major features in common show far more in common than minor features in common.

Never mind though, we've discovered the definitional barriers. If you contemplate delaying an election, that's fascism. Actually doing it, that's not fascism.

Wow - using the royal "we" because no one else here is buying your ludicrous argument. For some reason, you are unable to grasp the concept that PM of New Zealand has the legal authority to establish election dates within limits while the US President does not. Which means that Mr. Trump is seeking to illegally delay the election while the PM of New Zealand is not seeking to act illegally. Hence the allegation of fascism against Mr. Trump has some merit but no merit against the PM of New Zealand.

I agree that Mr. Trump doesn't have the authority to delay the election. Does he have the authority to contemplate it? Is he allowed to think about it?

 

[laughing dog]

Actually no. Major features in common show far more in common than minor features in common.

Never mind though, we've discovered the definitional barriers. If you contemplate delaying an election, that's fascism. Actually doing it, that's not fascism.

Wow - using the royal "we" because no one else here is buying your ludicrous argument. For some reason, you are unable to grasp the concept that PM of New Zealand has the legal authority to establish election dates within limits while the US President does not. Which means that Mr. Trump is seeking to illegally delay the election while the PM of New Zealand is not seeking to act illegally. Hence the allegation of fascism against Mr. Trump has some merit but no merit against the PM of New Zealand.

I agree that Mr. Trump doesn't have the authority to delay the election. Does he have the authority to contemplate it? Is he allowed to think about it?

Mr Trump can have any feelings he wants - fascist feelings and non-fascist feelings.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I agree that Mr. Trump doesn't have the authority to delay the election. Does he have the authority to contemplate it? Is he allowed to think about it?

Mr Trump can have any feelings he wants - fascist feelings and non-fascist feelings.

So when Trump thought about it, he wasn't breaking any laws? Can I quote you on that?

 

[ZiprHead]

I agree that Mr. Trump doesn't have the authority to delay the election. Does he have the authority to contemplate it? Is he allowed to think about it?

Mr Trump can have any feelings he wants - fascist feelings and non-fascist feelings.

So when Trump thought about it, he wasn't breaking any laws? Can I quote you on that?

Do you mean he didn't think about breaking laws?

 

[Jarhyn]

So when Trump thought about it, he wasn't breaking any laws? Can I quote you on that?

Do you mean he didn't think about breaking laws?

Honestly, I don't think he thought about breaking laws. I think people around him thought about it, but HE didn't. He just does it without thinking, like breathing.

 

[laughing dog]

I agree that Mr. Trump doesn't have the authority to delay the election. Does he have the authority to contemplate it? Is he allowed to think about it?

Mr Trump can have any feelings he wants - fascist feelings and non-fascist feelings.

So when Trump thought about it, he wasn't breaking any laws? Can I quote you on that?

I specifically used the term "feelings" as opposed to "thoughts". And whether or not Mr. Trump broke any laws is irrelevant to the issue of whether or not he is a fascist for wanting to delay the election.

 

[KeepTalking]

Actually no. Major features in common show far more in common than minor features in common.

Never mind though, we've discovered the definitional barriers. If you contemplate delaying an election, that's fascism. Actually doing it, that's not fascism.

Wow - using the royal "we" because no one else here is buying your ludicrous argument. For some reason, you are unable to grasp the concept that PM of New Zealand has the legal authority to establish election dates within limits while the US President does not. Which means that Mr. Trump is seeking to illegally delay the election while the PM of New Zealand is not seeking to act illegally. Hence the allegation of fascism against Mr. Trump has some merit but no merit against the PM of New Zealand.

I agree that Mr. Trump doesn't have the authority to delay the election. Does he have the authority to contemplate it? Is he allowed to think about it?

Anyone is allowed to think anything they want, as it is impossible to know what people are thinking. Of course this isn't about what Trump thinks, it is about what he has said. If Trump has no filter between his brain and his mouth that is not our problem. It is reasonable to hold people accountable for the things they actually say, even when those things are the authoritarian ramblings of our fascist President.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Jason defending the President that sent unmarked Federal Agents of dubious authority to Portland to pull people off of the streets? Man, some Libertarians are pretty liberal about abuse of power against citizens.

 

[ZiprHead]

I have been told that if Trump even speculates on delaying the election for any reason, that is proof he is a fascist dictator.

This sounds so very trumpian.

 

[ZiprHead]

Jason defending the President that sent unmarked Federal Agents of dubious authority to Portland to pull people off of the streets? Man, some Libertarians are pretty liberal about abuse of power against citizens.

Yup.

What make trump a fascist is the body of work.

 

[Jarhyn]

Jason defending the President that sent unmarked Federal Agents of dubious authority to Portland to pull people off of the streets? Man, some Libertarians are pretty liberal about abuse of power against citizens.

Yup.

What make trump a fascist is the body of work.

Libertarians when we talk about collecting taxes or expecting publicly licensed businesses to serve the whole public: HOW DARE! GOVERNMENT OPPRESSION! STATE VIOLENCE!



Libertarians when secret police abduct people protesting actual government violence: AMERICA, FUCK YEAH! PASS ME THAT BOOT! <Lick lick lick>