I believe you meant tack.
That’s too bad, because “tack” might have made sense.
tact
/tak(t)/
noun
- adroitness and sensitivity in dealing with others or with difficult issues.
“the inspector broke the news to me with tact and consideration”
If you say so.
Sorry, today’s Trock is gone.
Please feed the next one less. It encourages them.
Poe’s Law applies. Without outside knowledge (like knowing they are a sock), there’s really no way for us to tell if somebody is a troll or somebody who genuinely holds unpleasant/foolish/ignorant beliefs. Especially when they are making such a common argument.
When I find trolls pretty much using the same arguments I use, I have second thoughts about what I am saying.
I doubt it’s relevant. In the absence of this particular buzzword, the MAGAddled would simply find something else like accusing Democrats of breaking eggs at the wrong end or something.
I think it has become self-righteous shaming that bothers me as Christian, So I did something 30 years ago that’s not acceptical now, and I can’t be forgiven? Who is “ideological” pure?
- what was it, and
- Did you admit it was wrong and ask for forgiveness in the first place?
All very true. I dislike the whole, “wokeness” shenanigans anyway. It’s a stolen word being used in a stupid way. They take things that are good, twist them, mock them, and make them seem like they are bad. Much like they did in the election. The main thing that lost the election, was the economy (which many of the voters will soon find is going to crash and sink, like the Titanic. It’ll be fine though 'cause they’ll blame it on Biden, Harris, Obama, Wokeness. See how that works?) Right behind the economy was misogyny and racism. It’s as simple as that.
Saying the Democrats didn’t support wokeness because they didn’t campaign on it is just like saying the Republicans aren’t fascist because they didn’t campaign on it.
The only ones talking about the Republicans being fascist were the Democrats…Just because ‘only’ the Democrats talked about it and the Republicans didn’t, doesn’t mean the Republicans aren’t fascist.
No, both because fascism is far better defined and because the Democrats only campaigned on “wokeness” in the fantasies of the Republicans. As has been said over and over they ran away hard from anything that might be considered “woke”, which of course did them no good at all because that was never the problem in the first place.
I really can’t argue with most of this. I do think the Democrats should focus more on their base. I think Harris did try with the, “Opportunity Economy,” but there wasn’t a lot for the working poor in her message. I really think the Democrats keep trying to move right, and the right is just moving farther away from them every election.
Yes; it’s a very effective tactic of the Right that the Democrats keep falling for.
Plenty of leftists use the word ‘fascist’ every bit as broadly as rightists use the word ‘woke’. The word “Fascism” may have a set definition in the dictionary or on Wikipedia or whatever, but these people don’t care about it. It means what they want it to mean.
…what I actually said was Democrats didn’t campaign on wokeness because they didn’t campaign on wokeness.
They just…didn’t.
Not on immigration. Not on Gaza. Not on healthcare. Not on trans rights. Not on policing. Not on prisons. This was a decidingly non-woke campaign. If I was American and could vote I would struggle to vote for Biden or Harris because both of them had horrible policies on things that I hold dear. If you want to see the poster child for what the Republicans (and the Democrats) would consider “woke”, that person would be me. Defund the police. Universal healthcare. Free Palestine. Catch and release. Repeal the 13th. Trans rights. Thats me. I’m so woke that I think AOC has moved to the centre.
The Democrats are NOT woke. They didn’t campaign on it. They don’t believe in it. The Republicans went crazy. And the Democrats became Republicans.
I got in a Facebook argument with someone about the issue, assuming the same thing as you. Her response was to dump several dozen videos on me of people claiming they were witnesses to dog-eating and cat-eating.
People who are into conspiracies fundamentally don’t acquire knowledge in the same way as other people. It’s tempting to believe they view their conspiracies as metaphors or allegories, but they don’t. The literal truth of their idiocy is central to their identity.
Nahhhh. I understand that many people need to believe this. I also understand why they need to believe this. But that doesn’t make it true. I’ve both mentioned and posted it before, but let’s do it again:
Go point by point, and then look at videotape of Trump speaking – his own words – and see whether each point can be supported without resorting to left-wing propaganda and innuendo.
It’s a fun ‘at-home game’ that anybody can play.
And I have. It doesn’t end well.
Here’s a quickie list from the article:
There are many different flavors of fascism of course, but the most curious thing about the Trump years is that “obsession with national security” is mostly absent. He fawns over foreign dictators.
He’s appointed Tulsi Gabbard, an obvious Russian agent to head of national intelligence. He’s literally throwing away national security.
Unless, of course, we consider that “national security” may be referring to a different nation - the white nation. If you make that assumption, then all the pieces fall into place, all the “enemy within” stuff.
Lots of Trump’s behaviors are cause for grave concern and vexation, but the one that absolutely chills me to the bone is his appointment of Tulsi Gabbard to National Intelligence. It’s unfathomably dangerous in ways that we’ll never know until it’s too late.