This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
bijouxbroussard · F
They often tend to be vague, because many are operating on misinformed premises. Like not believing the results of a fair election because the [b]loser[/b] told them it was fraudulent, and that the legal challenges proved unfounded because the system was corrupt (again, based on the word of said loser).
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
bijouxbroussard · F
@Vin53 I used to try, but it tended to go as follows:
Them (unfounded generalization about "libs")
Me: Based upon what ?
Them: Incident or quote by individual [b]they[/b] consider liberal, usually misreported or misquoted by Fox or Breitbart
Me: That’s [b]not[/b] what they did (or said). This is the context.
Them: That’s a "lib" source. Fox is fair and unbiased.
Me: Seriously ? It’s more than one source. Some are international. Fox is often discredited.
Them: (insults, usually involving “commie”,etc.)
Them (unfounded generalization about "libs")
Me: Based upon what ?
Them: Incident or quote by individual [b]they[/b] consider liberal, usually misreported or misquoted by Fox or Breitbart
Me: That’s [b]not[/b] what they did (or said). This is the context.
Them: That’s a "lib" source. Fox is fair and unbiased.
Me: Seriously ? It’s more than one source. Some are international. Fox is often discredited.
Them: (insults, usually involving “commie”,etc.)