well, calm down then and stop calling people 'shitstains' and 'pieces of garbage' just because they disagree with you. how old are you, 12?

Firstly, I'm not a Democrat. Secondly, the thread is clearly about elected representatives, candidates, and legislation.

Anyone with any level of honesty recognizes that a YouTube video about a story involving Kate Perry's shoes isn't remotely relevant.

I merely seek to interact with you on a level you can comprehend. When you are capable of debating points of fact, opinion, and nuance, I'm certainly willing to have a very serious discussion.

Until then? Why should I pay you more respect than you pay... Um... Anyone?

And you still seem to think your opinion matters. But it doesn't. It's my vote you have to sway. I'll go either way depending on merits.

You spend your entire time trying to alienate everyone who bothers to question your viewpoint. Not a great idea. Hence, I'm being accurate. You alienate those who're willing to be persuaded away from your viewpoint with your insults and mockery, then bitch and moan when you get the orange man bad as a result. Little Jaycry disappeared entirely as a result even. Yet if you didn't spend all of your time alienating those who're perpetually on the fence, not to mention attacking your own party, it's possible even Clinton could have been elected.

You're your own worst nightmare, and you're too much of a shitstain to even understand the problem.

Go on and get a nap, fender. You need some recovery from all those crayons you've been eating. I'm very concerned you might experience an overdose.



There is no specificity in the topic post. So no, it is NOT clearly about elected officials. And based upon the fact that the Democratic party's elected officials are reacting to the current scenarios around them, rather than attempting to shape those scenarios, I don't believe that attempting to base any discussion off the elected officials of the democratic party is useful at all.

Current Democratic policy has nothing to do with the long held stances of the people in office. It's all about the modern identitarianism of the extreme far left. As that shit ramps up, more and more of their own continue to be gobbled up. Shall we talk about officials in Virginia perhaps? We could talk about Hollywood producers and celebrities. We could always talk about the current attacks on Dorsey. I mean I don't know, you made a topic about the left cannibalizing itself. Influencers are influencers. And celebrities rank high on that list.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Mar 19 2019 05:07pm

twelve it is. get well soon, friendo.
btw, i love how my little crayon jab stuck with you, that really seems to sting still...

This post was edited by fender on Mar 19 2019 05:30pm

No specificity? The very first sentence in the OP is: "In a continued effort to not display partisan hackery in PaRD, and because it's a reality that is becoming ever more prominent, I decided I'd create a megathread for instances of intra-party conflict within the Democrat Party."

The OP highlights the response to Ilhan Omar's comments by Democratic Party members.

Post #2 is about legislation, notably the Green New Deal and H.R.8.

Again, if you want to merely hack away about the regressive left at-large, you'll find no shortage of opportunities to do so in PaRD.

Sometimes I wish PaRD had a tribunal or voting system in which PaRD regulars would cast a vote on whose position is more logically sound and accurate. It would come in handy in moments like this.

you're assuming rational people trying to be objective and actually looking into what both parties posted though, when in reality it would just be a popularity contest based on ingroup / outgroup bias...
the same people making such moronic posts in the first place would be the ones judging...

Oh, no doubt that many people wouldn't approach it objectively. A boy can dream though.

EVERY registered democrat who is attacking another registered democrat reflects intra-party conflict.

How is this hard to you? I feel like I'm explaining something so simplistic that even a two year old could understand.

And I did NOT hack away at the "regressive left". I never even named such. I was speaking of progressive on progressive aggressiveness. And seriously now, say THAT shit 6 times fast.

According to your topic post, my post was yet another example of intra-party conflict within the Democratic Party. It perfectly fits the definition. The fact that you wish to suddenly restrict which specific members of the democratic party may be included? That's your problem, and has nothing to do with this topic.

Perhaps you should learn to be more specific in how you word your topics if you want that level of specificity. Myself, I word my shit as vague as possible. Never know what you can learn if you just allow people to go off in whatever direction they will.

It's pretty well specified, as I've already pointed out. Further language in the OP mentions that: "this thread can instead be used to track and note challenges between moderate v. progressive members of the party, and/or established v. freshman members of the party." Again, every example in the OP and in post #2 are about elected officials, candidates, and legislation. It's not a sudden restriction at all.

A video about Katy Perry getting criticized over her shoes isn't relevant and offers nothing to the topic at-hand.

Lastly, I'm confused about why you so often say that people are stupid, or imply it, and say that they don't understand politics, or that they don't know the fundamentals of debate. It's just generally unpleasant.

Name a left wing belief you have.