Bernie's In

You aren't under my skin at all. You posted a video that you said should raise questions. I pointed out the cherry picking and misuse of data in the video.


That led me to a question that you have yet to answer -

Shouldn't you change your name if you are going to continue to apply no reasoning or logic or basic fact checking to the things you post?


Clearly you can't defend the video with any facts. You seem to think the cherry picking and data manipulation is just fine. That would imply your name has nothing to do with your critical thinking skills hence my question.

It looks like someone is playing games.

It's just an endless stream of lazily selected, non sequitur or nonsensical youtubes intended, I guess to impress by sheer weight of numbers. He doesn't try to make an argument and support it with reason or documentation, he just posts another stupid youtube video like it's supposed to represent some authority or something. I've got him on ignore but click on him every so often to see if he is either being reasonable or logical - and so far, I agree with you. He really needs to change that moniker.

What is the game?
It seems some people, like you, can't even read a news crawl.
Of the 1% that is in, Hillary has 69% of the votes counted so far. There are 67 delegates at stake. 60 regular delegates and 7 super delegates.



But that still leaves us with today's question?

Shouldn't you change your name if you are going to continue to apply no reasoning or logic or basic fact checking to the things you post?

The person posting the video is playing games silly.

This is a very interesting news article. It goes in-depth about the Clinton machine committing fraud to win elections.

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-liberal/2016/06/clinton-machine-set-to-steal-puerto-rico-primary-today-via-more-voter-suppression-2530008.html

That is not a news article, it is an opinion piece. It even says so in the link.

it's only an opinion piece, that news source allows anyone to post their opinion without any cross check for credibility.

Kind of got that impression when I noticed the second sentence referred to Mrs. Clinton as "Killary". But then, so does Reasoning Logic. So the poster and his source are a match.

Yes, and YOU posted it here without bothering to check any of the facts in it.


The question of the day remains.

Shouldn't you change your name if you are going to continue to apply no reasoning or logic or basic fact checking to the things you post?

Gullible Idiot would be appropriate. You've got to be pretty far gone to take David Icke seriously. I admire Parados for taking the time out and trying to educate him. I don't have the patience, or believe it will do any good, there's no cure for stupid.

True, parados should get a medal for breaking down each one of Reasoning Logic's propaganda videos and showing where the illogic is. Watch how Reasoning just tries to dance away from it, without success.

Yes, Parados does deserve the Official A2K Merit Award for Patience above and beyond the call of duty.

(I posted this in the 'I'll never vote for Hillary' thread as well)

I started this whole process admiring Bernie Sanders. At this point I don't even see him as honest, much less honorable.

I just saw him asked what he intended to do and when he intended to do it as far as conceding the nomination, throwing his support to Hillary and encouraging his supporters to support Hillary.

He said something to the effect of "I don't have any magic wand to make anyone support Hillary. It's up to Hillary to convince my supporters that she is worthy of their vote". What a crock of disingenuous, self-seeking bull. He is in this for Bernie. He is not even acknowledging that what he says and does at this point will certainly be a factor in his supporters decision making. His actions now are having less and less to do with any noble political movement, and they don't bespeak any kind of personal integrity. They are the cheap and juvenile acts of someone motivated by a desire to stay at the center of attention, full stop.

Bernie Sanders didn't construct the grassroots movement that grew up around him, and he doesn't control the people who comprise it. He only has the power of the progressive movement as long as he earns it, as he has been doing.

If he were to call on his followers to support Hillary, he'd lose the trust he's earned and he knows it.

It would be up to a candidate to change voters' minds. Since dishonesty is her primary trait, Bernie supporters of the Bernie or Bust variety would likely not believe anything she would say.

Bernie would be considered dishonest by his followers if he threw in behind Hillary.

I've been fairly hard on Bernie, but I want to say for the record that I do understand he is in a tough spot. The issues his campaign has brought to the fore are of momentous importance, and cannot lightly be discarded. A living wage, a pivot away from fossil fuels, affordable or free college and healthcare, big money out of politics - these are all things that his campaign has forced Hillary to talk about, and the country to take notice of. I'm sure that probably a part of this reluctance of his to stand aside is a genuine concern that those issues will not be carried forward.

That is a legitimate reason for not promptly making a decision to concede and support Hillary, and I understand that.

The timing is everything - the moment Bernie is satisfied that he has extracted every bit of good for those grass roots people that he can is an important moment.
I hope at that moment he chooses to publicly and convincingly support the Democratic candidate.
If he loses the nomination and doesn't do whatever he can to support the nominee (and yes the most important thing he can do is make a real effort to bring supporters along) that will prove to me that the good of the many is not outweighed in his mind by the good of the Bernie.

I am still hoping that is not the case.

I can see there to be some truth to this as well but I will be honest and say that Parados had a motive just like the rest of us and she/he too is sharing a subjective experience.
We could have a discussion about the empirical data that was being shared in the video "even though I try to stray away from the idea of empirical data.

I personally think that Parados was sharing a subjective opinion about the video.
Maybe it would be helpful if we brought others into this discussion that many others find to be intellectual? What could it hurt? maybe we could all learn something.
I do have to say that I have always seen some intellectual ability in Parados.

What is your subjective view point of this Bernie speech?

Is there any wisdom in this 3 minute interview or is this just a waste of time?

Does this 1 minute video make you smile?