United States | News & Politics

Sure, pretend to have trouble reading, that helps your case so much

I'm not pretending, you used language ambiguously. Like I said, wrong pronoun for the first one, namely wrong plurality. Is it one thing or several? I asked about one thing in the first part of my question. So you make me have to guess about what you mean. And then you throw a tantrum when I patiently try to work around you and explain. You could, instead, recognize your ambiguity and clarify.

Similarly, the second part of question did not ask who you support, but then your answer implied it did. What should I guess from that? Well, you can see my attempts.

It isn't fucking hard

It is obviously incredibly difficult to get a direct answer given how long this thread is.

"Yes, I'm against genocide, and against supporting genocidal candidates"

How is that the wrong pronoun?

You are confused about what quotation marks are used for, again. You never said that sentence, which literally only has one pronoun, in the conjunction "I'm". I am obviously not confused about that. Here is what you wrote:

Yes I'm against them

No, i don't support them

I've already said this multiple times

Why pretend otherwise?

It's the "them", in the first sentence, which is a plural pronoun. The first part of my question asks about one thing, genocide. Not plural.

You should thank me for patient I am with you.

Genocide and genocidal candidates add up to more than one thing.

You gave a no answer to one and a yes to the other. Obviously the "them" cannot mean both simultaneously.

"No, I don't support genocide or genocidal candidates"

Really not hard to parse whatsoever.

Another set of quotes used for something you didn't say. And remember,, the question you are responding to did not ask about your support. You keep confusing yourself with this. The question was whether you are (1) against genocide and whether you are (2) against voting for genocidal candidates.

Why do you have to act like things are so hard

As I have demonstrated, you have a bad habit of inserting terms when allegedly answering a yes or no question. And ambiguous and inappropriate pronouns.

Personally, I would prefer to not talk about language and clarity but this is the nonsense you have me deal with instead of just sticking with a clear yes or no to my yes or no question that it took you 4-5 reminders to even attempt answering.

I've answered your question so many fucking times and you still haven't actually responded to it.

When you claimed to have provided an "emphatic no" to my question ("Are you against genocide and voting for genocidal candidates?") I did respond to it, remember? A "no" response to that question, which you claimed to have provided an "emphatic no" to, would mean you are not against genocide and/or you are not against voting for genocidal candidates. I generously assumed you are actually against genocide since some of your other comments said so, and openly xonclyded that this means you are not against voting for genocidal candidates. Then I went off for a while about what that meant. Then you accused me of misinterpreting your "emphatic no" to my yes or no question.

And now we are back at "can this person provide a clear yes or no answer". I have even offered you two interpretations of the second half of my question and dusentangled the parts so that you can clearly describe your meaning in the terms in which I presented my question. Instead you're throwing in your own new phrasings.

Anyways, I will attempt to work with your new framings at the end, at least a little. I am too patient.

You instead just continue to act as if i haven't answered. Instead of continuing the discussion, you're just keeping us trapped here, locked in this endless cycle of you asking the question and me answering, over and over until the eventual heat death of the universe.

Remember, I would rather you just gave yes or no response to my yes or no question. You decided to play around and say unclear things.

It seems that your "emphatic no" is really a "yes" with unclear pronouns and reframings but somehow this is my fault.

The crazy thing is, looking through your comment history at your general opinions, it seems we actually agree on almost everything. So why are you so mad at me?

I am not mad at you. I am dismissive of you for trying to avoid my question like every other liberal and for trying to pretend the situation is not as simple as I presented it. It actually is, liberals just try to treat their inconsistency and cognitive dissonance as some kind of nuanced complexity.

Regarding having to ask you questions over and over again and try to get you to directly and clearly provide an answer you will stand by: that is obviously me being very latient with you.

You're just fucking trolling at this point. Fuck off

Do a modicum of self-criticism on this exchange and you will see that I am correct in my responses. You are behaving defensively and have said several contradictory things. Unfortunately, you have also done so while trying to shore up liberal excuses for supporting genocide, such as the alleged complexity of big standard liberal electoral logic, and refuse to recognize that it is a dead simple as answering a yes or no question. And look at how much work it has taken you to do that simple thing, with my help. It was not complex. This is literally fifth grade discourse we are having here. But hoo boy, how much did you write that was not just saying "yes" or "no"?

Anyways, apparently your answer to my question is actually "yes". You announce, for suresies, that you are against genocide and against voting for genocidal candidates. I am glad we are in agreement!

So tell me, why was that so hard for you to say?