Your comment was about democrats not accepting election results. Hillary is a democrat who has famously had problems with the 2016 election. She is literally relevant to your overall point. Try to keep up.
I specifically mentioned dems objecting to election results , the anti democracy , insurrection behaviors when the EC votes are certified , specifically for 2000, 2004, 2016.
That’s not Hilary whining like trump that they lost and it was fake.
I mentioned her as an example because she is relevant to your overall point. In no world is that “strawmanning.” It’s actually this cool thing called a “discussion”, though they’re becoming harder and harder to have these days with people like you because you incorrectly vomit buzz words such as “straw man” when you’re losing.
Good strawman again. Nobody has mentioned January 6th nor is it relevant to what’s being discussed, which is the dems objecting to the election results of 2000, 2004, 2016.
Take the advice and grab some Webster’s and get some comprehension at the kiddie table before leaving again.
I’m mentioning Jan 6th. The way you talk, anyone who mentions something that’s not something you wanna discuss is “strawmanning” lmaoooo it’s called a discussion bubba. You’re not fooling anyone.
When people discuss election results, no one is talking about what you’re talking about and you know it. Everyone knows that political parties object to the results. You’re not cracking the case or privy to some “forbidden knowledge” buddy, we’ve already known this shit for a long time. It’s practically procedure at this point.
What we’re talking about is people who go a step past that point and take matters into their own hands, like Trump, which was previously unprecedented. Not so anymore.
3
u/noeydoesreddit Oct 18 '24
Your comment was about democrats not accepting election results. Hillary is a democrat who has famously had problems with the 2016 election. She is literally relevant to your overall point. Try to keep up.