I didn’t make that claim. I said that the photo depicts a bunch of Democrats holding picket signs about race mixing, which it absolutely does. You made that claim up inside your head because the idea that this is true is offensive to your sensibilities. Classic rejection of reality in avoidance of potential trauma, it’s a self-defense mechanism.
LOL... literally. 1950s Southern Democrat = 2023 Democrat is equivocation, and fallacious. Is anyone here denying they both used the name 'Democrat'? I'm not. I'm saying the name is the same, but denotes different parties with different membership and vastly different ideologies. I have no cognitive dissonance about any of this. These distinctions seem to be very clear to everyone else here, except you.
It doesn’t denote different parties, the photo depicts a different snapshot in time. The Democrat party didn’t disband and reconstitute itself, it is the exact same party. The only thing that changed with the passage of time is people’s attitudes, which applies to every facet of life. To say that this is a different party is to lie, it’s an obfuscation of history to retroactively call them anything else. They were Democrats at the time and they were protesting race mixing. Those are the facts, however difficult to swallow they may be. It’s okay, it’s in the past now, they can’t hurt you with their signs anymore.
This is incorrect. It is unclear whether the conviction can be in a local jurisdiction, on a federal level or if it has to take place before Congress. It’s actually subject of debate among scholars as we speak, since it’s never happened before.
Some Americans will have to provide the details on this, but from what I gather, they were a subset of (Southern) Democrats whose views were not representative of the mainstream Democrats at the time, or now. But, sure, you win. Equivocation rules! Fallacies for everyone! The glove fits! You must convict!
They were definitely a subset and definitely from the South. I don’t see how that’s relevant. You can keep saying that it’s equivocation, those are yesterday’s Democrats picketing. What happened to “remember history or you’re doomed to repeat it”? I know who they identified as, and so do you. It is a part of the party’s history, and it always will be.
As pointed out, they tried and the Republicans blocked it. Tho I'm sure there is a group that would then turn around that the Government is doing too much, if it passed.
I very much doubt that, what with the vaccines being available before Biden took office. Even if true, excess deaths of Republicans have nearly doubled the excess deaths of everybody else, and you aren't gonna convince anybody it's because they're listening to Biden's advice on the topic. The Trump cult is both homicidal and suicidal at this point.
So nothing but deflection from you as usual. But you're right, it's besides the point as James Comey isn't the one having this conversation with me, you are. So what you still said in a whole lot of words is that you think Trump is innocent due to ignorance. You never denied it, you just tried to deflect it elsewhere.
You're completely full of shit.Trump's freedom of speech 100% crossed into violent or otherwise illegal action.
I seem to remember a whole lot of Democrats proclaiming that they “won’t take the Trump vax”, only to immediately change their mind the moment the new guy was offering them the same shot. Hmm… were there any prominent figures propagating this kind of rhetoric… oh, right, Kamala Harris, the current VP, did it on NBC.
Some Southern Democrats were racists sixty or more years ago. This is well known history. The point is that you are willing to equivocate all day long about Democrats, arguing a spurious connection between the racist historical subset and the modern Democrats as if it has any relevance to the present discussion, whist writing pages pointing out the tiniest nuances and technicalities to defend rightwing criminals. Its almost as if racism and criminality don't matter as long as you're "winning".
@Xzi is not a bot, he’s a valuable forum member and I happen to find conversations with him interesting, for example because they give me some insight into how the other side feels or thinks. He’s one of the few left-wingers here who can hold a moderately long and productive conversation, he sometimes makes good points and he knows both how to score a good W or a massive L. He’s one of the better POLtemp users, which isn’t saying much, but is definitely a fact.
The concern for Democrats was that Trump was trying to rush the vaccine for political points, but it quickly washed away once they were able to see the results of clinical trials for themselves. Republicans, being unable to read or understand basic biology, tried to spin those results as a negative thing. Skepticism isn't a bad trait, generally speaking, but an unwillingness to adapt new viewpoints when presented with new information is.
