![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
I have lots of reasons that I am critical about how you use your intelligence, but I assure you I hold no ill will towards you.
Where did you get your psychology degree from?
Nowhere, which is why I linked to a Harvard website.
I have lots of reasons that I am critical about how you use your intelligence, but I assure you I hold no ill will towards you.
Where did you get your psychology degree from?
Nowhere, which is why I linked to a Harvard website.
I’m not attacking you, I’m offering you up a respite for your mental health. We all need it sometimes.
If you are constantly pessimistic, spending so much time on places like Lemmy is probably at least part of the problem.
Unwittingly you’re proving their methods worked, because you’re still talking about them.
She could have some illness, I have no idea.
But your evidence of such is two videos, one from 7 years ago when and one misrepresenting her acting shocked from 6 years ago.
If you think this is even remotely convincing that she is going to die in the next 6 months, it’s not me suffering from delusion.
You even know the video was misleading, which is why you posted it without context. You’re desperate to avoid admitting you were wrong, and maybe even in this case easily duped by propaganda…so it has to be me that is foolish and making up excuses.
You think you see yourself in me, which is why this has you so frustrated. But I assure you, it’s your shortcoming alone here.
Wait you think her poorly acting like she’s surprised is ill health? Holy shit you’re stretching.
Are you suggesting that she won’t make it till Jan? Because that just ridiculous if you have to point to something that happened seven years ago to prove it.
Shed be finishing up her second term and there is no evidence that she is in some poor health. It seems you keep mistaking Trump’s shortcomings for Clinton’s.
In 2016 many people I read thought a Trump presidency would literally be the end of US democracy
And it almost was. Remember, he lost an election and tried to send fake electors in to declare him president. When that didn’t work, he worked up his cultists into attacking the capitol in order to threaten pence into not certifying the election. It was so dangerously close to a constitutional crisis that Republicans and Democrats banded together to say that the VP does not have this power.
Also trump nominated three members of scotus, and it was that majority that just opened the door for the president to commit all kinds of crime with immunity.
The pain of his last presence is still playing out, and it doesn’t look good.
I’m more concerned that if he wins again, he’ll complete gut the government and even if he does step aside when his term is up, the damage will be done and we will have no ability to tackle some of the biggest issues facing us: namely climate change.
No way in hell would Clinton have been even remotely as corrupt as Trump. You’re just projecting the fact that you are using any excuse to excuse his corruption.
First, let me apologize i thought it was another poster who had linked to that.
Second, i addressed it, i didn’t ignore it. You ignored my rebuttal. But i will try again here:
Even what you quote here doesn’t say the court ruled it was true.
You’re just exposing your own ignorance, as often the court doesn’t bother to determine if the plaintiffs claims are true, they just assume they’re true and then rule they don’t have a case because they aren’t claiming someone broke the law.
This doesn’t say it is true, only that it doesn’t matter whether it’s true because it has no bearing on their ruling.
I’m blocking you now. Good bye.
Intellectual coward.
I’m generally pretty generous when it comes to realizing I’m hearing one side of the story and that it’s always much more complicated.
But, dear God man, if what he says is even remotely true and she was hovering over him while he was sleeping, and then when he awoke she asked if he would murder someone for her, and then what he plans to do with their cat after the murder, that’s not just being “genuinely afraid” and acting irrationally when in the middle of being very afraid.
She might be suffering from some anxiety that she needs to address, but let’s not play down how disturbing this is…especially because he called it “the usual.”
Holy shit you gotta love the Internet with people, based on this one story, thinking it makes sense to warn that she might be planning a murder suicide. Lol wow.
You know, the usual.
I’m sure it’s been said already, but there is nothing usual about what you described. She sounds unstable and you should reconsider this relationship.
But to be pedantic, nothing about what you described sounds even remotely like gaslighting.
I literally pointed you to the court case where the court said the DNC was rigging the convention against Sanders
No you didn’t. You made a claim about a court case that doesn’t exist. You didn’t link to anything or even name it.
Your eyes literally won’t allow you to see
You’re right, my eyes won’t allow me to see the fantasy you’ve created.
You’ve got to be a troll. We’re done here.
Don’t blame me for your inability to support your claims.
Well it is.
Even in the outside chance that the third party wins, we still immediately revert to a two party system. It solves nothing as the nature of our voting system is to turn into a two-party system. It’s a vanity vote, that’s it.
This pattern cannot continue.
And voting third party in the presidential election does not stop it from continuing. At best it just switches what “two parties” we are voting for. If you want to stop this from continuing, you work locally to get how we get local candidates elected (like STAR or ranked) and then you work up from there. But you don’t want to. You want to just do the simple thing of casting a vote and believing you’ve “done your part” which is why it’s a vanity vote.
The presidential vote is a strategic one that you use understanding the rules of the game you are actually playing, not the one you (and I) wish you were playing.
So you ignore the facts you don’t like, and take the ones you do. And I’m projecting…
How can I ignore that which you did not provide? All you’ve done throughout this is give your opinion about what happened, no actual facts. I would be more than happy to address any fact you have, because having had this discussion so many times already, I’m pretty confident I’m on the right side of it, and if not, I would like to learn how so and change my position. As I already have.
Why the fuck do you think Wasserman Schultz stepped down?
You made a claim as to why, so why not back it up?
hat is your explanation if it’s not the scandal involving her bias as chair exposed in the emails?
You’re claim was that she tried to rig the convention against Sanders, and you’re already backtracking it. Amazing.
What possible benefit to you gain from this denial of established reality?
lol You really have no idea how out-classed you are in this. I clearly challenged you to actually provide some facts, and all you are doing is attacking me instead.
Don’t worry, I’ve had this same type of discussion with hundreds of Trump/Sander reality-deniers before, and I know no way in hell you can admit to yourself at this point that you’ve been fooled for so long. But It’s sill funny watching you squirm.
Again, let me be clear: provide your sources for your empty ass claims that I’ve already called out. Anything short of that is an admission that you realize the facts are not on your side.
Ohh, a political “scientist” said it, must be a fact.
No, a political scientist didn’t “say” it, they did a study with an attempt to objectively determine what actually happened, and the evidence led to a certain conclusion. You just don’t like that the evidence contradicts how you feel so you’re sarcastically trying to hand-wave it away. This isn’t to say I know for a fact that what they say is the truth, but their evidence-based position is 1000x more reliable than your feelings.
I will now pretend that Wasserman Schultz didn’t actively admit to trying to rig the convention against Sanders and that the court literally said in plain english that’s what was happening.
Neither of these statements is true.
The way you people try to rewrite history is insane.
Projection. Notice how I’ve been providing facts and links, all you’ve done is provide how you feel about it. You are just like the Trump supporters that think they know the 2020 election was rigged against Trump. It turns out cultists are not all that different from other cultists.
If you feel that way, then I’m sorry for giving the wrong impression. But I assure you it’s not the case.
The better way to get me to stop responding to you is to simply not respond to me; I’m not going to respond to the same post over and over again until you respond. If we are having a back-and-forth, I would hardly call that “harassment.”