this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2024
1231 points (96.3% liked)

Political Memes

5490 readers
1900 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I can’t really find anything ... but I’m certain ...

I think I found the flaw in your logic.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Nah, they for sure were there, were called up by Waltz, and for sure used some level of force. I can't find anything specific about how much force because the media doesn't generally like talking about that, but mostly because there's so much recent news and I'm not spending all day doing research for an internet comment a handful of people will see and doesn't really matter anyway.

It really isn't important, but the people pretending it didn't happen (like you) are self-sabotaging, because it's going to come up. Just be aware with it and come to terms with it. It happened and it's not ideal. He's generally pretty good though and I like him. You don't get to have a perfect candidate, and ignoring the flaws makes your whole foundation fragile.

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

but the people pretending it didn’t happen (like you)

I see another flaw in your logic. How am I pretending it didn't happen? Or is anyone that replies to you in a way that is non-affirmative "pretending it didn't happen"?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Your post is implying that my post not providing evidence is implication that there isn't evidence, and as such didn't happen. (The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.) What other conclusion could be drawn? What was your intended message if this was not the intent? I can't find another interpretation of your message except doubting that it happened, so perhaps you can bring light to it?

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago

I can’t really find anything … but I’m certain …

I think I found the flaw in your logic.

Holy logical overreaching, batman! My comment was just pointing out a common logical trope nowadays, being certain of something without confirming the evidence to back it up. Everything else after that ( "but the people pretending it didn’t happen (like you)" ... "that there isn’t evidence, and as such didn’t happen") is baggage you've tacked on.

You are creating strawmans and overreaching while parting from a lack of logical rigor in referencing evidence (but at least you are honest about that last part). I don't think I've read anyone who is claiming it didn't happen, just differences on the when, where, and how, nuance that you are admitting your comment lacks.