• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Silly or Serious?

pinqy said:
You “might” be mistaken? The names are right there on the posts. It’s not a matter of opinion or speculation.
Click to expand...

Okay then why do you keep denying your own post!! The statistics were right on your own comment.
 
HumblePi said:
Okay then why do you keep denying your own post!! The statistics were right on your own comment.
Click to expand...
My fault for not double checking which was post 93.

But I NEVER STATED ANYWHERE “So tell me how is giving money to those that are unwilling to work help us get to 100% renewable energy.” As you falsely claimed.

That wasn’t me. Didn’t say it in # 93 or anywhere else.
 
pinqy said:
My fault for not double checking which was post 93.

But I NEVER STATED ANYWHERE “So tell me how is giving money to those that are unwilling to work help us get to 100% renewable energy.” As you falsely claimed.

That wasn’t me. Didn’t say it in # 93 or anywhere else.
Click to expand...

I already have and you're too far gone to talk any sense to. So, goodbye and good luck with your life of disassociation from the truth.
 
Bullseye said:
What part do you see as silly? Seems like fairly good paraphrasing of GND. Possibly a little rhetorical license but not "silly". Why don't you quote me the section from the GND he was talking about for each "silly" accusation and show how he was materially wrong in his characterization?
Click to expand...
It’s good paraphrasing of the right wing propaganda version.

The Democrats want to replace gas cars with electric cars by investing in the technology and infrastructure needed to do that.

Absolutely nothing in the GND said anything about limiting the numbers of cars you own, you’re just a dupe if you think that was in there.

GND didn’t say ban airplanes, it said make them unneccessary by building other transportation infrastructure like high speed rail.

“Force destruction of virtually every structure” is not found in the GND.

You have the burden of proof backwards. You want to claim this was all in the GND? You ****ing prove it. YOU quote the GND where you think this is supported. You know what? You can’t. Because you never read it in the first place.
 
HumblePi said:
I already have and you're too far gone to talk any sense to. So, goodbye and good luck with your life of disassociation from the truth.
Click to expand...

Seriously?
braindrain said:
Your correct but only if you pick and choose which parts of the GND you want to talk about.
So tell me how is giving money to those that are unwilling to work help us get to 100% renewable energy.
Click to expand...

Note the name: braindrain, not pinqy.

I just linked to the data. I was not making any point, just giving the statistics you asked for.

Then you falsely claimed I said what was actually a quotation from braindrain.
 
Deuce said:
It’s good paraphrasing of the right wing propaganda version.

The Democrats want to replace gas cars with electric cars by investing in the technology and infrastructure needed to do that.

Absolutely nothing in the GND said anything about limiting the numbers of cars you own, you’re just a dupe if you think that was in there.

GND didn’t say ban airplanes, it said make them unneccessary by building other transportation infrastructure like high speed rail.

“Force destruction of virtually every structure” is not found in the GND.

You have the burden of proof backwards. You want to claim this was all in the GND? You ****ing prove it. YOU quote the GND where you think this is supported. You know what? You can’t. Because you never read it in the first place.
Click to expand...
LOL, you've got all the silly GND slogans down perfectly, no need to actually read the post you're responding to. AOC will probably send you an autographed picture.
 
HumblePi said:
The numbers of what you call "those unwilling to work" have absolutely NO impact on the GND OR renewable energy.
Click to expand...

You really are not making any sense at all any more. It's not me calling them unwilling to work. It's those who wrote the summary of the GND. And the number of how many people that might be doesn't matter. You claimed the GND was just about getting to 100% renewable energy. The people who helped wrote the GNDs summary prove you wrong.

Unfortunately it's rather to obvious what is going on. You just are unable to admit you were wrong so you simply keep digging and making yourself look more ridiculous by the post. You are doing it with me and now you are doing it with pinqy.

It's sad really.
 
Last edited:
braindrain said:
You really are not making any sense at all any more. It's not me calling them unwilling to work. It's those who wrote the summary of the GND. And the number of how many people that might be doesn't matter. You claimed the GND was just about getting to 100% renewable energy. The people who helped wrote the GNDs summary prove you wrong.

Unfortunately it's rather to obvious what is going on. You just are unable to admit you were wrong so you simply keep digging and making yourself look more ridiculous by the post. You are doing it with me and now you are doing it with pinqy.

It's sad really.
Click to expand...

I never claimed "the GND was just about getting to 100% renew-ability". I never said that - never. Copy and paste that statement from me if that's what you're claiming.
 
HumblePi said:
I never claimed "the GND was just about getting to 100% renew-ability". I never said that - never. Copy and paste that statement from me if that's what you're claiming.
Click to expand...

It is literally what you have been trying to imply for the majority of this thread. That is pretty much all you have been doing

HumblePi said:
The Green New Deal is about putting a LOT of people to work in developing new technologies, building new infrastructure, and getting us to 100% renewable energy. That's it in a one sentence nutshell. Nobody is going to rip down every skyscraper in Manhattan, put locks on the wheels of your gas engine car, take away your hamburgers or stop airline travel.
Click to expand...

Well that and proving you are unable to admit you made a mistake even when it's in black and white.
 
braindrain said:
It is literally what you have been trying to imply for the majority of this thread. That is pretty much all you have been doing



Well that and proving you are unable to admit you made a mistake even when it's in black and white.
Click to expand...

"the GND was just about getting to 100% renew-ability".

"the Green New Deal is about putting a LOT of people to work in developing new technologies, building new infrastructure, and getting us to 100% renewable energy."

You are comparing those two sentences and stating they are the same thing? You sort of left out a bunch of words, didn't you?
 
HumblePi said:

"the GND was just about getting to 100% renew-ability".

"the Green New Deal is about putting a LOT of people to work in developing new technologies, building new infrastructure, and getting us to 100% renewable energy."

You are comparing those two sentences and stating they are the same thing? You sort of left out a bunch of words, didn't you?
Click to expand...
You obviously disagreed that providing for the economic security of those unwilling to work was part of the GND as you have been arguing that it wasn't for the majority of this thread.

The lengths you will go to just to avoid having to admit you made a mistake are incredible. And very sad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom