If that's your rejoinder, that means you have no real criticism or comeback. You're just being cantankerous. Best regards. - ThreadSky

novapsyche444.bsky.social • 22 days ago

If that's your rejoinder, that means you have no real criticism or comeback. You're just being cantankerous.

Best regards.

Comments

orgorithm.bsky.social•22 days ago

Nothing you said negated my point. It's a bad strategy to allow someone to win when you can turn the tide for a better option. Dems made some mistakes when campaigning, but the fact that voters were stupid enough to make them choose between one voting bloc and another meant they lost either way.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•22 days ago

3/ I've written quite a bit about this, much more than I can fit in this very keystroke-limited medium (as you yourself snarkily pointed out).

https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/exit-polls-explain-only-so-much

https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/an-increasing-number-of-democratic

https://novapsyche.substack.com/p/blaming-non-voters-for-harriss-loss

orgorithm.bsky.social•22 days ago

And yet you're still making numerous posts instead of being concise.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•20 days ago

Dude, again your beef is that I’m not being concise? Can you speak to the points I’m making?

I tend to work in long form, which is why I pointed you to the essays I’ve written about this topic. Did you examine those arguments? Or were you still steamed that you had to read more than 300 characters?

orgorithm.bsky.social•20 days ago

Yes, that's my beef. People who can't be concise tend to come in two forms: The philosopher who can't think for themself and therefore can't describe the ideas in simple words. And the infomercial salesman who thinks using more words will convince people the product isn't garbage.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•19 days ago

2/ But what I will say is, I'm not here to be insulted. Again, if you want to have a discussion, we can. But you stated things that were untrue, showing that you were willing to jump to conclusions. So the onus, really, is on you. I find it amusing that you're attempting to point fingers outward.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•19 days ago

Look, I do not owe you an explanation as to my writing style. I was once much more concise than I am these days. If you are not able to read essays, then that's not something I can help. I pointed you in the direction of where I am able to make my point in an extended argument.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•22 days ago

2/ Those voters who felt in a moral quandary about whether to affirm a canddiate who was A-OK with funding and materially supplying a genocide were perfectly within their rights not to affirm that. My point is that the Democratic Party should never have put them in that position.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•22 days ago

You are determined not to understand my point, apparently.

My point is that Harris knew what she needed to do to attract those votes. She declined to do so. She's not dumb--she had to have strategized that she could make up those votes elsewhere. She figured wrong. This was her MISTAKE.

orgorithm.bsky.social•22 days ago

I've understood your point. Part of what I'm saying is that in the process of winning those votes, she would also lose votes on the other side of the spectrum. She might have won more than she lost, but it's hard to say.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•22 days ago

Here's another person giving a similar perspective to my own. He's talking about Jon Lovett's response to Musk giving the Nazi salute, but within that critique he also speaks to the mismanagement of the overall Harris strategy of chasing mod Republican votes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgmQKp_l5FY

orgorithm.bsky.social•22 days ago

"A similar perspective" meaning "I took my perspective from them because it sounded good, so maybe they'll be able to convince you with arguments that I can't think of myself".

novapsyche444.bsky.social•20 days ago

No, I had thought of those arguments long before I’d come across that video. Do you understand datestamps? Did you happen to see when I’d written those essays to which I pointed you, and when that video was uploaded?

You seem determined to insult, instead of converse.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•22 days ago

What other side of the spectrum? She went after moderate Republicans and came up with a smaller share of them than Biden did in 2020. Is that the other side of the spectrum to which you refer?

orgorithm.bsky.social•22 days ago

If she had gone pro-Palestine, she would have been smeared as an antisemitic terrorist sympathizer. She wasn't just going after moderate Republicans, she was also going after retaining centrist Democrats and undecided voters (although every single Republican won over is worth 2 of the others).

novapsyche444.bsky.social•20 days ago

2/ As for your 2nd point, her plan was bad, in retrospect. Do you see that? It didn’t work. She lost Republican voter share as compared to Biden in 2020. She didn’t energize her own voters. Centrists did not respond. It was a bad strategy.

novapsyche444.bsky.social•20 days ago

All that Harris needed to do was say that she would enforce US & int’l law w/r/t foreign policy. That would be interpreted as enforcing the Leahy law in addition to other stipulations. There’s nothing anti-Semitic in such a statement at all.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply