lost, not stolen

Discussion of the recent unfolding of history.

lost, not stolen

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Jul 15, 2022 3:55 am

A just released document put out by conservative republicans,
and to name them which helps to make the case..

Senator John Danforth
Benjamin Ginsberg
the Honorable Thomas B. Griffith
David Hoppe,
The Honorable J. Michael Luttig
The Honorable Michael W. McConnell
The Honorable Theodore B. Olson
Senator Gordon H. Smith..

These GOP types released a document called

"Lost, not Stolen: The conservative case that Trump LOST
and Biden won the 2020 presidential election

in which they make the case that IQ45 lost the election and
that Biden won and there was no steal of any kind...
and they go into details.. 72 pages of details that lay out exactly
how Biden won the election and no, he didn't steal it..

but hay, don't believe me, read the document itself if
you have any doubts..

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Jul 15, 2022 4:07 am

rinos peter. those are rinos. anyone who doesn't follow trump as if he's the messiah is a rino.
pending
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 32402
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby Meno_ » Fri Jul 15, 2022 3:40 pm

True enough, try to convince die-hard Trumpeteers, a considerable and influential block of that.

They have a lot of grudges to grind.
Meno_
The Invisible One
 
Posts: 13241
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby obsrvr524 » Fri Jul 15, 2022 9:41 pm

-
Argumentation Theory -
An argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so.


You philosophical blokes are supposed to already know that so pundits can't make issue out of fallacious arguments.
              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
    It's just the same Satanism as always -
    • separate the bottom from the top,
    • the left from the right,
    • the light from the dark, and
    • blame each for the sins of the other
    • - until they beg you to take charge.
    • -- but "you" have been observed --

The prospect of death weighs naught upon the purpose of life - James S Saint - 2009
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4226
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Jul 15, 2022 9:43 pm

hey observr can you confirm this? are all those people rinos now?
pending
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 32402
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby obsrvr524 » Fri Jul 15, 2022 10:17 pm

Mr Reasonable wrote:hey observr can you confirm this? are all those people rinos now?

No some are just socialists/global communists (such as McConnell).
              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
    It's just the same Satanism as always -
    • separate the bottom from the top,
    • the left from the right,
    • the light from the dark, and
    • blame each for the sins of the other
    • - until they beg you to take charge.
    • -- but "you" have been observed --

The prospect of death weighs naught upon the purpose of life - James S Saint - 2009
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4226
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Jul 15, 2022 10:42 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:
Mr Reasonable wrote:hey observr can you confirm this? are all those people rinos now?

No some are just socialists/global communists (such as McConnell).


they call themselves republicans tho
pending
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 32402
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sat Jul 16, 2022 2:23 am

obsrvr524 wrote:-
Argumentation Theory -
An argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so.


You philosophical blokes are supposed to already know that so pundits can't make issue out of fallacious arguments.


K: so, what specific argument are false in the 72 page document?
Simple enough question, can you tell me what is specifically wrong
or part of a "fallacious argument, in the 72 pages?

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby obsrvr524 » Sun Jul 17, 2022 10:30 am

Mr Reasonable wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
Mr Reasonable wrote:hey observr can you confirm this? are all those people rinos now?

No some are just socialists/global communists (such as McConnell).


they call themselves republicans tho

I guess it depends on how you define a "rino".

I assume they mean "a republican party member who is actually a democrat party devotee". I know that some republican party members are actually global socialists and almost the entire democrat party are global socialists - but that doesn't make them on the same team.

Both Putin and Xi Jinping are global authoritarians - but in competition for the prize - one more oligarchy dictator and the other more communist dictator (one less pure communist - more socialist). The analogy fits Sen McConnell (the "republican") and one fits Sen Schumer (the "democrat").

Does that make McConnell a "rino" - I don't know. It does make both traitors the US Constitution.
              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
    It's just the same Satanism as always -
    • separate the bottom from the top,
    • the left from the right,
    • the light from the dark, and
    • blame each for the sins of the other
    • - until they beg you to take charge.
    • -- but "you" have been observed --

The prospect of death weighs naught upon the purpose of life - James S Saint - 2009
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4226
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby obsrvr524 » Sun Jul 17, 2022 10:34 am

Peter Kropotkin wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:-
Argumentation Theory -
An argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so.


You philosophical blokes are supposed to already know that so pundits can't make issue out of fallacious arguments.


K: so, what specific argument are false in the 72 page document?
Simple enough question, can you tell me what is specifically wrong
or part of a "fallacious argument, in the 72 pages?

Kropotkin

I don't know - haven't read it - and like most of your posts - hardly worth any effort.

Your argument was that because a lot of people say it's true - it must be true.

I thought all philosopher types knew better than that - even you otherwise grossly ignorant types.
              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
    It's just the same Satanism as always -
    • separate the bottom from the top,
    • the left from the right,
    • the light from the dark, and
    • blame each for the sins of the other
    • - until they beg you to take charge.
    • -- but "you" have been observed --

The prospect of death weighs naught upon the purpose of life - James S Saint - 2009
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4226
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby Sculptor » Sun Jul 17, 2022 11:13 am

obsrvr524 wrote:-
Argumentation Theory -
An argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so.


You philosophical blokes are supposed to already know that so pundits can't make issue out of fallacious arguments.


Yes, it is ignorant clowns like you that follow the twittering loons, and the Facebook warriors who know fuck all about the details of the election that are falling for argumentum ad populum.

What the RINOs have done in this paper is to present EVIDENCE.
Ichthus77 loves himself
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby Sculptor » Sun Jul 17, 2022 11:17 am

obsrvr524 wrote:I don't know - haven't read it - and like most of your posts - hardly worth any effort.

Your argument was that because a lot of people say it's true - it must be true.
.


No that is what YOU are doing you fucking moron.

You know fuck all about the details of the election.
You do know that several courts across the land found nothing.
If you had been paying attention you would also know that Trump's legal team offered no evidence.
You also ought to know that people of sound mind the length and breadth of the country think Trump is an idiot.

Yet with zero evidence you follow the Trump like a little lambikins to the slaughter.
Ichthus77 loves himself
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby obsrvr524 » Sun Jul 17, 2022 11:28 am

Sculptor wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:-
Argumentation Theory -
An argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so.


You philosophical blokes are supposed to already know that so pundits can't make issue out of fallacious arguments.


Yes, it is ignorant clowns like you that follow the twittering loons, and the Facebook warriors who know fuck all about the details of the election that are falling for argumentum ad populum.

What the RINOs have done in this paper is to present EVIDENCE.
Sculptor wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:I don't know - haven't read it - and like most of your posts - hardly worth any effort.

Your argument was that because a lot of people say it's true - it must be true.
.


No that is what YOU are doing you fucking moron.

You know fuck all about the details of the election.
You do know that several courts across the land found nothing.
If you had been paying attention you would also know that Trump's legal team offered no evidence.
You also ought to know that people of sound mind the length and breadth of the country think Trump is an idiot.

Yet with zero evidence you follow the Trump like a little lambikins to the slaughter.

You have proven me wrong -- #-o

All of you otherwise grossly ignorant types actually don't know better. :-?
              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
    It's just the same Satanism as always -
    • separate the bottom from the top,
    • the left from the right,
    • the light from the dark, and
    • blame each for the sins of the other
    • - until they beg you to take charge.
    • -- but "you" have been observed --

The prospect of death weighs naught upon the purpose of life - James S Saint - 2009
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4226
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: lost, not stolen

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun Jul 17, 2022 4:10 pm

obsrvr524:
An argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so.
You philosophical blokes are supposed to already know that so pundits can't make issue out of fallacious arguments.

K: so, what specific argument are false in the 72 page document?
Simple enough question, can you tell me what is specifically wrong
or part of a "fallacious argument, in the 72 pages?

O:
I don't know - haven't read it - and like most of your posts - hardly worth any effort.
Your argument was that because a lot of people say it's true - it must be true.
I thought all philosopher types knew better than that - even you otherwise grossly ignorant types.

K: you say its wrong but you can't say, HOW it is wrong because you are far too
lazy to engage with actual evidence...and my posts are irrelevant.. about the
actual facts on hand.. what facts are wrong in this 72 page document?
And that is how the right wing rolls, friends... presented with actual facts,
they lie and run away.. and make up shit excuses to avoid the facts...
babbling/making up shit about "a lot of people say its true" I never said
that, Observe said that.. he is holding to a statement that only he has
written about, no one else as claimed this 72 page document as being
something "popular" or desired by the "masses"... he is making a counter
argument based on something he said, not on what I said..

I predict he will vanish for several days now... because that is what
gutless cowards do..

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state


Return to Current Events



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users