A Clear Demonstration that the Squad Does Not Control the Democratic Party

[WuWei]

@JayJay

@WuWei

The good news is, by banding together to once again deny The Bern, the DNC has opened the Moral Authority Door for The Squad to take complete control.

Viva La Revolucion! Que Viva!

Scintillating logic

Thank you. I suggest starting with Why Men Rebel by Ted Gurr.

There is also a lot of good research from the Baader–Meinhof group.

[Smyrna]

@WuWei

Sure you do. You’re different. Superior.

“Special”

[H_Arendt]

@WuWei

@H_Arendt

@WuWei

@H_Arendt

@Smyrna

@H_Arendt

You sound like an arrogant elitist talking down to people you disagree with. How do you presume to know what motivates other people?

“Actions”…speak louder than words…and all we have to do is…observe.

What have you observed that wasn’t fed to you by conservative talk radio? Be specific.

Where do you get your observations?

I listen to and read a wide spectrum of content and opinions. My cultural heritage stresses the importance of understanding and being able to argue both sides of an argument. So as not to fall into the Sarah Palin trap of claiming I read “all of them”… on a given day I spend time on the New York Times website, the Fox News website, the Al Jazeera website. Whenever I am in my car in the afternoon I tune into Rush or Hannity when available.

That’s where I get my information. My observations I tend to generate myself.

Sure you do. You’re different. Superior.

“Sure you do”. Early in the morning for you to start condescending… but if that is what you have got.

[H_Arendt]

@Smyrna

@WuWei

Sure you do. You’re different. Superior.

“Special”

I am just glad that Sneaky agrees with my mother on this. I doubt there is much else they would have agreed on, but what the heck.

[WuWei]

@H_Arendt

“Sure you do”. Early in the morning for you to start condescending… but if that is what you have got.

sow reap

[JayJay]

@WuWei

@H_Arendt

@WuWei

@H_Arendt

@Smyrna

@H_Arendt

You sound like an arrogant elitist talking down to people you disagree with. How do you presume to know what motivates other people?

“Actions”…speak louder than words…and all we have to do is…observe.

What have you observed that wasn’t fed to you by conservative talk radio? Be specific.

Where do you get your observations?

I listen to and read a wide spectrum of content and opinions. My cultural heritage stresses the importance of understanding and being able to argue both sides of an argument. So as not to fall into the Sarah Palin trap of claiming I read “all of them”… on a given day I spend time on the New York Times website, the Fox News website, the Al Jazeera website. Whenever I am in my car in the afternoon I tune into Rush or Hannity when available.

That’s where I get my information. My observations I tend to generate myself.

Sure you do. You’re different. Superior.

Not special.

Anyone can do it.

It takes a lot of hard work, and even then one can fall back into one’s anchors.

The only difference between you and others is you believe humans can never ever rise above their biases.

And that anyone who claims to do so to the best of their ability is not only lying but worthy of derision.

[PurpnGold]

@JayJay

Not special.

Anyone can do it.

It takes a lot of hard work, and even then one can fall back into one’s anchors.

Bootstraps, right?

Republicans have a lot of those. Shouldn’t be a problem

[markdido]

@H_Arendt

Only in the minds of those influenced by conservative media.

@H_Arendt

@SixFoot

In case you forgot, you’re going to vote for who the Democrat establishment tells you to, and that’s all there is to it.

You sound like an arrogant elitist talking down to people you disagree with. How do you presume to know what motivates other people?

“Only in the minds of those influenced by conservative media.”

Pot, meet kettle.

[SixFoot]

Without an ounce of effort on “our side’s” part, either.

[WuWei]

@JayJay

Not special.

Anyone can do it.

It takes a lot of hard work, and even then one can fall back into one’s anchors.

The only difference between you and others is you believe humans can never ever rise above their biases.

And that anyone who claims to do so to the best of their ability is not only lying but worthy of derision.

So much wrong. Start with Righteous Minds. You’re operating under a delusion.

[JayJay]

@WuWei

@JayJay

Not special.

Anyone can do it.

It takes a lot of hard work, and even then one can fall back into one’s anchors.

The only difference between you and others is you believe humans can never ever rise above their biases.

And that anyone who claims to do so to the best of their ability is not only lying but worthy of derision.

So much wrong. Start with Righteous Minds. You’re operating under a delusion.

I read Righteous Minds.

The author disagrees with you.

Or…rather…you didn’t go along on the complete journey with the author.

[Jezcoe]

@JayJay

@WuWei

@JayJay

Not special.

Anyone can do it.

It takes a lot of hard work, and even then one can fall back into one’s anchors.

The only difference between you and others is you believe humans can never ever rise above their biases.

And that anyone who claims to do so to the best of their ability is not only lying but worthy of derision.

So much wrong. Start with Righteous Minds. You’re operating under a delusion.

I read Righteous Minds.

The author disagrees with you.

Or…rather…you didn’t go along on the complete journey with the author.

That and evolutionary psychology is a lot of bull ■■■■■

[TommyLucchese]

@Jezcoe

That and evolutionary psychology is a lot of bull ■■■■■

Ah, evolutionary psychology, the soft science of choice for the intellectual incel.

[WuWei]

@JayJay

I read Righteous Minds.

[WuWei]

@Jezcoe

That and evolutionary psychology is a lot of bull ■■■■■

Here you go.

[WuWei]

@TommyLucchese

@Jezcoe

That and evolutionary psychology is a lot of bull ■■■■■

Ah, evolutionary psychology, the soft science of choice for the intellectual incel.

Look! A parrot!

[TommyLucchese]

@WuWei

Look! A parrot!

Hilarious. Too bad the idiots peddling this ■■■■ are wrecking a whole generation of young men. A solid quarter of males under the age of twenty five have never had sex or even had a girlfriend and guess what most of them believe in.

[WuWei]

@TommyLucchese

@WuWei

Look! A parrot!

Hilarious. Too bad the idiots peddling this ■■■■ are wrecking a whole generation of young men. A solid quarter of males under the age of twenty five have never had sex or even had a girlfriend and guess what most of them believe in.

Voice of Experience?

Let me assure you of something; you are NOT smarter than Jonathon Haidt.

Who happens to be a flaming lib by the way.

[JayJay]

Tommy’s pretty damn smart.

How would you propose we measure if he’s smarter than Jonathan Haidt?

[Jezcoe]

@JayJay

Tommy’s pretty damn smart.

How would you propose we measure if he’s smarter than Jonathan Haidt?

Someone can be smart and wrong at the same time.

I read Haidt.

It is interesting but I don’t think it holds up under scrutiny. His moral foundations work is good for constructing a heuristic, but it isn’t that great past that.

It’s a little too squishy.

But that is my problem with evolutionary psychology anyway.