leashyourkids wrote:
You are only correct in that I try not to engage you. If I may be direct, I find your thoughts on most things to be redundant, cherry-picked, and often irrelevant. You speak as an authority on any topic you discuss, and you are more self-congratulatory over meaningless predictions than anyone here.
A good example of this would be your insistence on bringing up Hillary's lead in overall votes when no one here is even arguing that. On the contrary, pretty much all Sanders defenders have conceded that he lost... and yet you repeatedly pound your chest about how she is kicking his ass and incinuating that all Sanders supporters are out of touch with reality.
Keep in mind that I engage both Nas, who I'm not even sure is serious and Rick, who is an irritant but is at least usually interesting or varied in his approach. That's because the point here is to engage in conversation and, frequently, argue very intensely over topics. Instead, you choose to write disjointed novels (irony with this post, I know) that rarely address anyone else's opinion and instead talk as though you are some sort of enlightened soul sent to set us plebes straight.
So, no, I won't be arguing with you in your weird, long-form debates (again, irony) when you show no interest in even having a conversation or showing the least bit of humility or self-awareness.
It is patently dishonest to suggest that people here have been posting about how Hillary has been kicking Bernies ass. They haven't, aside from three people. Instead there have been posts about momentum, emails, FBI investigations, personalities, dishonesty and the like. In addition is the fact you seem to have a problem because people decided to point out the flaws in Sanders. Also for a person that doesn't like arguing with me you sure do seem to like arguing with me.
It's invariably personal. Rather than address points, you choose to focus on me. The points that I made regarding the super delegate thing was neither redundant nor irrelevant yet you choose as is your pattern to ignore it for the truly redundant and irrelevant attack on me.
I really don't see myself as an authority on anything to be exact. I'm simply a guy that posts on a message board, as are you. I have done a little reading in my life and I don't apologize for that. I also don't view myself as some sort of board spokesman, or the guy to issue board referendums, nor the guy who assesses the pulse of the board. I simply posts here and if I have a disagreement I state it.
What I never do is pile on as you and others do and attempt to bully guys that I disagree with. My opinions are rightly or wrongly my opinions. I don't base my opinions on the guy that's posting. Can you and the others that constantly engage in piling on say that?
Each and everything that you post about me is primarily about me and not about what I posted. It's not even remotely annoying at this point. The interesting thing is that you complain about redundancy. How redundant is that?
Thus proving his point.