Anonymous #2 10w

You’ve just demonstrated my point. Instead of articulating a platform, you either deny the premise or fragment into sub-identities. A bimodal system forces resolution. You want input without synthesis, opposition without direction, and that’s how systems collapse. Petulant fucking children.

-2

Anonymous OP 10w

This is an incredibly low quality yap session it’s pretentious and boring. This isn’t Twitter we don’t reward you for sounding smart. I can sit here with you for hours and talk about policy solutions that help the American left take back power. We can talk about campaigns and what direction they need to go in.

3

Anonymous #2 10w

No, you dont know how to argue your way out of this, so you’re trying to preserve your image as you move for the exit.

-1

No, just like two your to fucking stupid to rebuttal.

0

The goal of a major political party is to resolve contradiction into policy. Madison outlined this pretty clearly in Fed 10 in that factions will exist, but they must synthesize, not splinter. If your party can’t do that, it’s not a coalition, but a volatile amplifying feedback loop.

-1

Block me now. You know you want to.

-1

Anonymous OP 10w

not here to argue, but it’s funny that you’re calling people stupid when your sentences look like this. i think you meant to write “No, just like two, you’re too fucking dumb to rebut.” first, comma’s are important. two, ‘your’ is a possessive form of you whereas ‘you’re’ is a contraction of you are. third, you should have used ‘too’. finally, rebuttal is a noun, you meant to use the verb rebut. if you’re gonna call someone stupid you should probably be at the top of your game but that’s just me

1

Anonymous #3 10w

N*

0

Anonymous #4 10w

And yet you don't understand the first thing about price setting. Laughable.

-1

Anonymous OP 10w

Did you want me to know price setting or have a vision for the country?

2