My glass half full argument.
You continue to double down on trying to equate my position as being silly. Why can’t we simply agree to disagree as we once did in the distant past?
It’s extremely dishonest.
Making stuff up out of whole cloth does not make a glass half full or half empty.
I’m sure it’s kinda like intellectual Ambien and helps you sleep at night, but that cup isn’t half anything other than ■■■■■■■■■
State your position, please. Is it that there was literally zero impact at all? Or is that the impact was negligible?
Monkey see, monkey do. Trump says “hoax” and all his ditto-heads propagate the mantra.
2 Likes
Why doesnt trump declassify the fisa warrant and solve this issue?
You know why and you know why your arguments are ■■■■
I thought I was clear with my prior comments. No impact.
Then I’m sorry but it is difficult to take you seriously here at all, because that is just silly.
What I’m hearing is that you seem to believe you are capable of coherent salient thought and that my disagreement with you means that I’m not. So once again we will not agree to disagree.
Sad!
It’s how you feel about “foaming at the mouth Trump haters”. Their disagreement with you means they are incapable of having a rational opinion.
Agreeing to disagree requires a fundamental understanding of the other person’s perspective, acknowledgment of its basic logic, rationality, and understanding of how the position is tethered to reality, and a disagreement as to the conclusion derived. Seeing as how you provide no logic or rationality, and are nowhere close to being tethered to reality in your position, there is nothing to be able to agree to disagree with. We can agree to disagree about whether water may be hot or cold. But we cannot agree to disagree over whether water is wet. The latter of which is what you are asking me to do.
4 Likes
Seriously?
Frothing at the mouth is frothing at the mouth. Has nothing to do with disagreement.
I no longer bother. On several occasions, I’ve attempted to provide supporting material, only to have it summarily dismissed as crap. Its simply not worth the abuse.
Of course it does. Are you claiming you don’t disagree with the people you call “frothing at the mouth Trump haters”?
There is no supporting material that can prove there was no impact on the election results. As I stated before, it is not quantifiable. Perhaps there is material that supports a position that the impact was marginal or negligible, but that is not the position you have taken.
I asked a simple question and got snark in reply. Observe:
Kelby
6h
**Russia was behind election interference**
MROT3.0: What 'lection interference exactly? Seems like you’ve got your mind made up on the issue…but about what? Russia meddled? Meddled how?
KELBY: Read a newspaper.
No no. I’m asked to believe and take as lock, stock, barrel fact that Russia interfered in a U.S. election. Where is the proof? Any proof?
Not asking for a book report here…which is a common troll ploy. Only asking for a fer instance. Where was a U.S. vote influenced? Which one? What SPECIFIC example can any of my real esteamed, righteous and outraged colleagues on here provide this humble questioner?
Need I remind that former president Obama flatly said such a thing was impossible? But that’s neither here nor there. He has known to be wrong from time to time. So who got influenced?
I certainly disagree with them, but that disagreement has nothing to do with my frothing at the mouth meme.
Who said anything about proving there was no impact.
No one can say with any certainty whether Russian meddling swayed the election in Trump’s favor. I never once stated that I could prove it didn’t. Based on my reading, I strongly believe it had no impact. You obviously disagree.
Why are you continuing to beat this dead horse? 
It is very easy to provide supporting material for your assertion that the Intelligence Community, “are making it clear that the meddling had no impact.”
Very easy.
Provide away.
1 Like
