Is whataboutism ALL the right wing has??????
Looks like it
Side Score: 2
|
 |
Nahh.. They is reel smart
Side Score: 6
|
|
|
|
|
No arguments found. Add one!
|
2
points
2
points
Con's response to alleged whataboutism is what about your whataboutism... This is an attempt to insinuate that whataboutism is never a valid response, which is false. When someone ignores an act for 8 years, then suddenly wakes up with a snort to the same act by the opposition party, it destroys their credibility to point out that...they voluntarily and happily ignored it for 8 years about those particular words or those particular acts. A prime example is when Con accuses Trump of Obamaisms and I point out that Obama said the same or did the same. This makes no claim on my part to say Obama was wrong, but to point out that Con cared less for 8 years. This particular brand of whataboutism is used to show the hyperbolic concern is either fake, or that with each attack, Con destroys Obama's credibility and legacy. It seems quite disingenuous for Democrats to ignore the left's provable collusion and romance with Russia for decades, and then suddenly claim Trump is guilty of treason for saying "Putin says he didn't intefere". Of course we both know that if Trump had scolded Putin, the leftist default headline was going to be "Trump is going to start WW3 with Russia", "Trump is insane" or "Trump is undiplomatic and nonpresidential". It's pretty sad when you know that regardless of what Trump says or does, the headline will be negative. It's even sadder that I can toss out guesses and predict every headline the leftist media will splatter across their front page prior to print. Side: Nahh.. They is reel smart
Hello A: I'd LIKE to say I haven't used it myself.. But, I have.. It ENDS debate. But, if a debate is nothing more than throwing whataboutism's back and forth, it's really NOT a debate. How can it be stamped out? I'm not gonna discuss personalities here, but most debates are simply a barrage of whatabouts thrown back and forth. I find no satisfaction in that. It gets us nowhere.. We don't agree, but at least we debate. I AM influenced by our debates, which is WHY I debate in the first place.. Hurling ad hominins get's real old after a while.. excon Side: Looks like it
Let's talk about Hillary and why the bitch is a loser !!!! Pretty Simple SUPER STUPID !! Clinton's remarks, like Obama's in 2008, smacked of liberal elitism — liberals talking to liberals about a group of people they don't really know or hang out with, but feel free to opine about when talking to each other. It's always problematic to speak in generalizations, something liberals would be the first ones to point out. At the point in which you hear yourself saying that you might begin talking in "grossly generalistic terms," it's probably best to re-think what's coming next. That's especially true when you don't have data to back up your point. The biggest problem in Clinton's statement is that she said "half" of Trump supporters are racists, xenophobes and otherwise bigots. Half means equal or near-equal parts. There's no data to support such a specific number. As i say SUPER STUPID and i am backed up by National Panhandler Radio you IDIOTS have no data or facts to prove any point. Side: Looks like it
|
