Rangelus

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They obviously don't, because you're literally the only one here trying to argue the messenger and not the message.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I don't care about the tone, I don't think they are serious, I think they are using hyperbole to bring attention to the issue. They are a minor party, I doubt we would be talking about it otherwise.

I am capable of engaging in the discussion without focussing only on the tone of message and dismissing everything else.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (5 children)

It's not a particularly nuanced statement in the first place, is it?

You know full well what their intent is with this rhetoric. You know full well the point they are trying to raise. The fact that you insist on arguing about the messenger and tone of message shows you don't want to engage with the problem being raised in good faith.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Hmm, sync posted the reply as a top level comment. Weird.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

No nuance with you huh?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (7 children)

If you think that's the message TPM is trying to get across, then you are dumber than I gave you credit.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

Fuck this noise. This government is exhausting.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (9 children)

You always bring up the messenger and ignore the message. No-one else here does that so regularly.

This is why formal logic should be taught in schools. Saying that the way the messenger gets their message across is the reason to ignore the message is the very definition of Ad Hominem.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Lets clarify what we're talking about.

The incident in parliament, I agree with you. The incident at the florists, a man against another man, I don't think it would even be news.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They seem more like a typical ACT voter tbh, not as far gone as a MAGA type radical right.

Although there are some similarities in the bad-faith arguments between those two groups.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I wouldn't be surprised at all.

The thing that annoys me is I doubt this story would be much of anything if Julie was a man. But because she is a woman she is 'hysterical' and 'unhinged'. I have no problem with politicians being passionate about their causes, but obviously she needs to rein it in and stick to acceptable decorum.

view more: ‹ prev next ›