• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Hillary vs Tulsi

Jason Harvestdancer said:
And if Tulsi endorses the front runner, and helps unite the left, and creates order in the US, does that also make her a Russian asset?

How much of the US is under Russian control?
Click to expand...

Strange question. Perhaps you don't understand what Russia's goals are? Secondly, is it your impression that an asset is the same thing as a spy or something? BTW: I don't think that it's likely that Tulsi will run third party now. I think that is why she appeared to be so pissed while on Fox news the other day.
 
Well, since the Russians have so much power in US politics, it seems reasonable to assume that just about anything is done because the Russians want it. They have assets in both parties. Note, I wrote "asset", not "agent" or "spy".

I guess the only person who isn't part of the Russian conspiracy is Hillary, and the only way to oppose the Russians is to support Hillary.
 
Harry Bosch said:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Lazily calling something a strawman without explanation. What a shocker. If Tulsi is called a "Russian asset" because Hillary and her comrades think Tulsi's actions benefit the Russians, and by doing so she boosts Tulsi in the polls, then that would also be to Russian benefit, so by Hillary's own logic, she is a "Russian asset" as well. The smear comes back to cover the smearer.
Click to expand...

What is your definition of an asset? It's pretty simple to me, if Tulsi runs as a third party, she will be helping the Russians keep Trump in. She'll be an asset. The Russian Bots didn't run ads saying how wonderful Trump was. They ran ads that attempted to divide the dems. Anything that divides the left, demoralizes the left, creates chaos in the US is a Russian asset.
Click to expand...

Yes. That seems to be Hillary's definition as well. And by that definition, how is she not a "Russian asset" herself? And why should anyone care if someone is a "Russian asset" by that definition wherein "Russian asset" is equated to mere democracy? That negative connotation is what makes it a smear.
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Well, since the Russians have so much power in US politics, it seems reasonable to assume that just about anything is done because the Russians want it. They have assets in both parties. Note, I wrote "asset", not "agent" or "spy".

I guess the only person who isn't part of the Russian conspiracy is Hillary, and the only way to oppose the Russians is to support Hillary.
Click to expand...

That appears to be her game. But again, of course if Tulsi is a Russian asset then anyone who does anything to increase Tulsi's likelihood of gaining power is a Russian asset, and Hillary's smear actually wound up boosting Tulsi in the polls, so Hillary herself must be a Russian asset too. Everyone is a Russian asset. Do you now or have you ever supported the communist party Mr. McCarthy?

Also, if Hillary and her comrades are so concerned with division within the Democratic party or on the left, then maybe they ought to fall in line with the progressives and quit supporting the corporate right. Their call for unity is completely and transparently self serving. Anyone who opposes them is pushed as being divisive, but Mrs "basket of deplorables" who lost the last election but insists on inserting her toxin again isn't divisive at all.
 
Jolly_Penguin said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Well, since the Russians have so much power in US politics, it seems reasonable to assume that just about anything is done because the Russians want it. They have assets in both parties. Note, I wrote "asset", not "agent" or "spy".

I guess the only person who isn't part of the Russian conspiracy is Hillary, and the only way to oppose the Russians is to support Hillary.
Click to expand...

That appears to be her game. But again, of course if Tulsi is a Russian asset then anyone who does anything to increase Tulsi's likelihood of gaining power is a Russian asset, and Hillary's smear actually wound up boosting Tulsi in the polls, so Hillary herself must be a Russian asset too. Everyone is a Russian asset. Do you now or have you ever supported the communist party Mr. McCarthy?

Also, if Hillary and her comrades are so concerned with division within the Democratic party or on the left, then maybe they ought to fall in line with the progressives and quit supporting the corporate right. Their call for unity is completely and transparently self serving. Anyone who opposes them is pushed as being divisive, but Mrs "basket of deplorables" who lost the last election but insists on inserting her toxin again isn't divisive at all.
Click to expand...

Imaginary: Correlational thinking. It's thus because it correlates with so. Example: Tulsi is a Russian Asset because if she says something others think effects them.

Reality: Causative thinking. It's thus because it is determined by so. Example: Tulsi abandons the Democratic party as a third party candidate and receives no democratic party money.
 
fromderinside said:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Well, since the Russians have so much power in US politics, it seems reasonable to assume that just about anything is done because the Russians want it. They have assets in both parties. Note, I wrote "asset", not "agent" or "spy".

I guess the only person who isn't part of the Russian conspiracy is Hillary, and the only way to oppose the Russians is to support Hillary.
Click to expand...

That appears to be her game. But again, of course if Tulsi is a Russian asset then anyone who does anything to increase Tulsi's likelihood of gaining power is a Russian asset, and Hillary's smear actually wound up boosting Tulsi in the polls, so Hillary herself must be a Russian asset too. Everyone is a Russian asset. Do you now or have you ever supported the communist party Mr. McCarthy?

Also, if Hillary and her comrades are so concerned with division within the Democratic party or on the left, then maybe they ought to fall in line with the progressives and quit supporting the corporate right. Their call for unity is completely and transparently self serving. Anyone who opposes them is pushed as being divisive, but Mrs "basket of deplorables" who lost the last election but insists on inserting her toxin again isn't divisive at all.
Click to expand...

Imaginary: Correlational thinking. It's thus because it correlates with so. Example: Tulsi is a Russian Asset because if she says something others think effects them.

Reality: Causative thinking. It's thus because it is determined by so. Example: Tulsi abandons the Democratic party as a third party candidate and receives no democratic party money.
Click to expand...

Yes.

And also reality:

1. Tulsi hasn't run and has said she will not run as a third party candidate.

2. Jill Stein is not currently running for anything whatsoever.
 
fromderinside said:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Well, since the Russians have so much power in US politics, it seems reasonable to assume that just about anything is done because the Russians want it. They have assets in both parties. Note, I wrote "asset", not "agent" or "spy".

I guess the only person who isn't part of the Russian conspiracy is Hillary, and the only way to oppose the Russians is to support Hillary.
Click to expand...

That appears to be her game. But again, of course if Tulsi is a Russian asset then anyone who does anything to increase Tulsi's likelihood of gaining power is a Russian asset, and Hillary's smear actually wound up boosting Tulsi in the polls, so Hillary herself must be a Russian asset too. Everyone is a Russian asset. Do you now or have you ever supported the communist party Mr. McCarthy?

Also, if Hillary and her comrades are so concerned with division within the Democratic party or on the left, then maybe they ought to fall in line with the progressives and quit supporting the corporate right. Their call for unity is completely and transparently self serving. Anyone who opposes them is pushed as being divisive, but Mrs "basket of deplorables" who lost the last election but insists on inserting her toxin again isn't divisive at all.
Click to expand...

Imaginary: Correlational thinking. It's thus because it correlates with so. Example: Tulsi is a Russian Asset because if she says something others think effects them.

Reality: Causative thinking. It's thus because it is determined by so. Example: Tulsi abandons the Democratic party as a third party candidate and receives no democratic party money.
Click to expand...

Reality: She resigned her position within the Democratic Party as a response to corruption. Therefore opposing corruption is beneficial for the Russians and supporting corruption is detrimental for the Russians.
 
Jolly_Penguin said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Well, since the Russians have so much power in US politics, it seems reasonable to assume that just about anything is done because the Russians want it. They have assets in both parties. Note, I wrote "asset", not "agent" or "spy".

I guess the only person who isn't part of the Russian conspiracy is Hillary, and the only way to oppose the Russians is to support Hillary.
Click to expand...

That appears to be her game. But again, of course if Tulsi is a Russian asset then anyone who does anything to increase Tulsi's likelihood of gaining power is a Russian asset, and Hillary's smear actually wound up boosting Tulsi in the polls, so Hillary herself must be a Russian asset too. Everyone is a Russian asset. Do you now or have you ever supported the communist party Mr. McCarthy?

Also, if Hillary and her comrades are so concerned with division within the Democratic party or on the left, then maybe they ought to fall in line with the progressives and quit supporting the corporate right. Their call for unity is completely and transparently self serving. Anyone who opposes them is pushed as being divisive, but Mrs "basket of deplorables" who lost the last election but insists on inserting her toxin again isn't divisive at all.
Click to expand...

It's a "toxin" to hold another view? Wow. I hope that the "progressives" don't want a democratic party where all must hold the same view and tolerance of other views isn't allowed. I'm sorry, the left isn't nearly strong enough to win elections on it's own. They need some moderates...
 
Harry Bosch said:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Well, since the Russians have so much power in US politics, it seems reasonable to assume that just about anything is done because the Russians want it. They have assets in both parties. Note, I wrote "asset", not "agent" or "spy".

I guess the only person who isn't part of the Russian conspiracy is Hillary, and the only way to oppose the Russians is to support Hillary.
Click to expand...

That appears to be her game. But again, of course if Tulsi is a Russian asset then anyone who does anything to increase Tulsi's likelihood of gaining power is a Russian asset, and Hillary's smear actually wound up boosting Tulsi in the polls, so Hillary herself must be a Russian asset too. Everyone is a Russian asset. Do you now or have you ever supported the communist party Mr. McCarthy?

Also, if Hillary and her comrades are so concerned with division within the Democratic party or on the left, then maybe they ought to fall in line with the progressives and quit supporting the corporate right. Their call for unity is completely and transparently self serving. Anyone who opposes them is pushed as being divisive, but Mrs "basket of deplorables" who lost the last election but insists on inserting her toxin again isn't divisive at all.
Click to expand...

It's a "toxin" to hold another view? Wow. I hope that the "progressives" don't want a democratic party where all must hold the same view and tolerance of other views isn't allowed. I'm sorry, the left isn't nearly strong enough to win elections on it's own. They need some moderates...
Click to expand...

You got that exactly backwards about what Hillary's toxin is. Otherwise I agree with you. There should be both liberals and moderates running. There can even be room for corporate Democrats. It isn't Tulsi, Bernie, Warren etc who are demanding others fall in line or they must be "Russian assets" or "Bernie Bros". It is Hillary and her corporate Democratic (not actually democratic) colleagues. They whine about the others falling in line behind them and if they don't then out comes the attempts to bully and/or smear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom