Not at all, but you don't understand - behind all of those ridiculous
attachments you have to arguments you don't like. That's not the man I
read, and liked based on his arguments 15 years ago about the JFK
assassination. Back then you always had valid arguments.
> >The way you just simply attack,
> >on a personal basis, those who don't agree with you, is remarkably
> >juvenile, being a professor and all. And no, I'm not neck deep into
> >anything at all that *you* understand. The GOP is, right now.
> >
> You are neck deep in identity politics, playing the race card
> constantly.
> >However, I'm very, very proud of never being called an ultraconservative
> >reality denier.
> Have you been called an ultra leftist reality denier?
Never. Even from my political opponents, and as much of a surprise as it
may be to you, not even about this crap you suggested where I have my
head.
> >Moreover, I'll simply watch what happens in the US as far
> >as voter suppression, onwards. Then we'll see who can look back at this
> >thread with his head held high.
> >
> The term "voter suppression" begs the question. You should know more
> logic than that.
I do - quit questioning my knowledge. You on the other hand, should not
even question others about this, but instead of dodging questions, answer
them.
> >The GOP is on a slippery slope, depending on excluding as many as possible
> >from voting, instead of realizing the simple fact that they should think
> >twice about their policies in certain areas,
> Like what?
Ask them!
> >instead of trying desperately
> >to apply various shortcuts in order to gain power and the trust of the US
> >people. The demographic changes in the US will, by necessity, make the GOP
> >choose their way.
> >
> OIC. "People of color" are going to take over, and consign the GOP to
> oblivion.
No, the *minorities* (the ones you don't seem to believe exists) that the
GOP refuses to acknowledge - will destroy the GOP. if they continue on
this path.
>
> In the first place, the youngest cohort of white voters went for Trump
> in 2020.
Yes, exactly. And what other cohorts that demographics are pointing to as
the growing ones is that minorities, women did not.
> the number will increase as Latinos become more assimilated. `
Yes. Because they were scared shit about the "socialism" crap. That's
why. To quote your debate style -*Do you understand *why?
The ^*migration* statistics, and that of *all minorites* says the opposite.
> >That is, certainly, if Trump long before then hasn't destroyed the GOP and
> >the conservative movement in the US.
> >
> What Trump has done is make the GOP clearly the party that opposed
> arrogant elites. Like the tech giants that censor content they don't
> like.
What an embarrassing statement, John. Read up on things before you utter
anything on this subject. Whether the elites are GOP or DNC I will leave
out, both probably. But as far as Trump, for heavens sake *do you not
understand* that the elites are his best friends? Those zero. point one
percent who gained 90 percent of his tax cuts? Trump doesn't give a s**t
about his "base. Right now his about to milk them of millions of dollars
to a new fund. He's a grifter, John. Nothing else.
Read up, John, You are out of touch.
My God. John. What you are defending is going to end up on the ash heap of
history. I would have never concluded this about you. This really isn't
about votes, is it?
>
> I'm guessing you like Facebook and Twitter banning Trump.
Here we go again with the ridiculous patronizing. Again, and again you do
this, John. That's the really sad part of this discussion. I would have
thought much better of you. The truth is that some of those you can't
speak to in the JFK assassination, I can - and I do, they've all rejected
you because of exactly what I've said here: learn, do not patronize people
left and right, like you do.
We're friends on FB, at your request. You know nothing about me, my
education, my experiences or anything else. You should learn how to treat
people who are not professors, and who are not a**holes.
So let me give you a taste, John. I'm an economist by profession, having
studied economics, political science and business administration for
almost five years All the years I've spent in both government and private
sector positions has been a fruitful experience, I don't degrade people
the way you do, constantly.
Simply speaking, I don't take this patronizing shit from you, shape up!
I demand respect from you, and the way you are dealing with me in this
thread, is not that of respect.
>
> And your time discussing voting in the US has been embarrassing, since
> you are attacking US Republicans for:
>
> 1.) wanting to ban mail-in voting.
> 2.) wanting voter ID
> 3.) wanting to ban ballot harvesting
They do. Look simply at the H.R.1 (I think the number is) which is going
through congress as we speak. Period.
>
> All of which would make US elections more like Sweden!
Exactly. And we have no voter irregularities, no voter fraud. Again -
PERIOD. "Do you understand" - to quote yourself? Spend the resources to
make this happen, is the answer you don't want do hear - or *understand*?
"If it ain't a problem, don't fix it". Remember?
- Make supporting voter lines in Georgia with food illegal, and make
voting polls fewer and less frequent?
Wake up, John. Your dinosaur views are gone help no one. Not you, not the
GOP and not real conservatives. Those real conservatives are going to
learn from what you are defending. They will have to.
>
> .John
> -------------------------------
>
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm