Reminds me of trying to have a conversation with my borderline personality mom where she simply will not address the actual issue…

As BO said to McCain when he tried to make a point after the presidency was decided in his (BO’s) favor: The election’s over, John. I won.”

So ultimately, the attorneys have won…

According to Jung, those with the P or “perceiving” trait care more about fitting in/getting along, while those with the J/”judging” trait care more about authenticity…Seems to fit.

First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people…

There we are. The “Johnny is a doodyhead” school of debate. How many name-calls can you find in that?

“Fascist absurdity” is the perfect phrase to describe this era in which, as in Orwell’s “1984,” truth is whatever Big Brother says it is — and you can’t just say so; you must BELIEVE (or bring out the rats.).

Sir, you are extremely misinformed:
1) Local officials did not corroborate election results in any states. Many election workers filed affidavids citing numerous discrepencies and failures to follow election laws, such as thousands more ballots cast than registered voters, etc., etc..
2) While many lawsuits were filed citing serious irregularities, NOT ONE court in the allowed the plaintiffs to present actual EVIDENCE. All the cases were dismissed for lack of “standing” or other technical (made-up on the spot) reasons. They were never “debated” in court.e
3) The Trump administration was filled with people who “resisted” President Trump during his term in office and they totally resisted even the very idea the of election fraud. AG Wm Barr was only one of many in the “resistance”. Documents prove he had not even looked into any claims of malfeasance in the 2020 election when he declared it free from any fraud.
4.) There is documented proof of election fraud. Video show people stuffing multiple ballots in drop boxes, multiple times. There is tangible PROOF the machines can be tampered with although the manufactures claim it impossible. There is video of election officials running 100’s of ballots through the counters multiple times.
Sorry, there isn’t enought space in this reply to prove the election was stolen. but stay tuned, SCOTUS may hear a case this year.

Has anyone (or “everyone”) noticed by now, how (along with “credentialism” and the rise of calling anything politcallly uncooperative to one’s own view), a new mode of “debate” has arisen?

It is what I call the “Johnny is a doodyhead” school of debate, because it so obviously is nothing but a return to what some used to try to get away from in elementary schoolyards, and that is “If what he says makes me uncomfortable” (not talking about sheer rudeness, which can merely be ignored once one is out of that age range)….the best way to “debate” him is to call him a name (I believe we used to call that “mudslinging” — accusing one of being something or NOT being something, whichever makes the other guy back down.

If we just went ahead and said what was obviously true, regardless of their “doodyhead” tactics, it would stop working. Ah, but people WILL “protect their image” I(when it really means doing the opposite, making them look childish and immature), but it doesn’t seem to dawn on those who keep right on with the “MAGA? Me? Naw, I ain’t no MAGA! Don’t try to call ME a racist!” (and of course, that’s why they keep right on doing it.

Remember how everyone was saying “we’re like idiocracy now” awhile back? Really, we were way past that point — anytime someone can get away with replying to “what is a woman?” with “Well, I’m not a biologist…” it seems they have forgotten that even in “Idiocracy,” the guy was not ashamed at all to say “I’m not a botanist, but I can see those plants need water.”

In other words, he didn’t NEED credentials to express the information he had picked up here and there, and he didn’t need to back down (and wouldn’t have if someone had hit him with “are you a botanist?” ( Maybe he said “biologist” in the movie, but it doesn’t matter.)

Oh, how far we have fallen. when someone who obviously ,knows less than you do (prob not a reader, who pick up misc info here, there, and everywhere) can make you back down and can “win” the “argument” merely by asking you if you have the proper “credentials” (as if there were no such thing as an autodidact), then I guess we’re doomed to lose all the arguments from now on, as we are the readers, and they — who challenge us with mediocrity and silliness — are those who think “If it’s not learned in school, it’s not real.”