I’m going to be honest, I have no idea what you’re on about now. You said something happens, I offered a potential theory, you can take it or leave it. Based on this thread alone, I’ve seen you responding aggressively to people entirely unprompted, and accusing them of saying things they haven’t. I’m not sure how much more productive conversation we could have, I’m willing to try, but I think the best shout might be to just draw a line under things there.
For you, the day free buses graced your village was the most important day in your life, but for me? It was Tuesday.
I think it’s probably contextual, the single word insults might fit better with the thread they’re in. But here, you’ve waded into a thread on a specific subject to insult and berate people for (supposedly) not being excited enough about a different subject. And then respond to anyone trying to give you feedback by accusing them of not being excited enough about that other subject despite them saying nothing about it.
I’ve heard that ‘lots of people’ are saying it.
Hard disagree, I’ve not seen a single person disagreeing with your points, only with the way you’ve raised them. Nor have I seen anyone express displeasure about the VA results, despite you talking about how ‘they’ are downplaying it.
In the interest of not stoking more argument, I would urge you to take a moment to read and parse the responses you’ve got here, and see if they natch up with what you think people are saying to you.
I might hazard to guess that some of the down votes are because of the aggressive tone you took, it doesn’t exactly invite a friendly discussion. I appreciate that politics are a charged subject at the best of times, but I think the anger needs to be channelled more effectively, maybe now more than ever. Which is to say that I fully agree with your statement about needing to avoid division.
The unfortunate trouble with written communication, where you can’t pick up on tone as easily. I’m not a fan of using /s, as I think it takes away from the comment, but I can see how it can be helpful to avoid misunderstandings.
No, the comment I replied to suggested acknowledging and addressing voters’ concerns, I sarcastically suggested the opposite.
Feel like your response to my, admittedly facetious, comment is overly aggressive. Obviously tactics need to be geared towards the voters in a given area/election, but the original joke I responded to is that this seems like an obvious tactic that is not utilised nearly enough, and I agree with and was building on that.
So you’re saying Democrats need to move politically to the right and promote the status quo, to appeal more to centrist voters?
VPNs for me, not for thee.
Reasonable gun control measures to reduce gun violence, especially in schools vs. blocking any possible dissenters of a fascist regime from defending themselves. I’d say that the latter sounds like a bad idea.
As opposed to the ‘official uniform’ all the others are wearing?