An interesting fact

[CivilDiscourse]

I do not "get upset" when Germany is mentioned [assuming by that you are referring to Nazi Germany]. I just wish people would show an informed opinion of German history from 1919-1933 and not make uninformed comments.

As I said, stay on topic, this is not on topic.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

As I said, stay on topic, this is not on topic.

You brought up the subject of Germany. Stay on your own topic.

[CivilDiscourse]

You brought up the subject of Germany. Stay on your own topic.

Since you don't want to stay on topic, Get out. You no longer get to post on this topic.

[CivilDiscourse]

I'm against foreign influence donations, which is one reason I'm against dark money.

Do you think not accepting foreign donations would put democrats at a disadvantage?

[Stoic]

Do you think not accepting foreign donations would put democrats at a disadvantage?

Depends on whether Republicans accept foreign donations, I guess.

[CivilDiscourse]

Depends on whether Republicans accept foreign donations, I guess.

So, what other policies do you advocate a race to the bottom on?

[Stoic]

So, what other policies do you advocate a race to the bottom on?

I don't advocate a race to the bottom. As I said, I'm against allowing dark money.

You should talk to the people who are in favor of it.

[CivilDiscourse]

I don't advocate a race to the bottom. As I said, I'm against allowing dark money.

You should talk to the people who are in favor of it.

No, you advocate one group using the lower standard of the two parties, which results in a race to the bottom

[Stoic]

No, you advocate one group using the lower standard of the two parties, which results in a race to the bottom

Dark money results in a race to the bottom. As I've said, I don't advocate dark money.

[Starlight]

CD, I have been noticing a pattern in the topics you focus on in this forum. You take the topics that Republicans are worst on, and that are major reasons people vote Democratic, and find instances of Democrats doing those things at tiny little bit and then make a big deal of how Democrats are doing that thing and ignore that Republicans do it way, way, way worse.

I'm curious, is this a conscious propaganda strategy on your part, where your strategy is to try accusing the opposition of the very thing your own side does way worse, in order to try and deliberately mislead people about the differences between the parties, and trick them into thinking the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans on these issues? Or are you being yourself duped by a particular news source you like to watch, that is itself using this strategy, and you are just gullibly repeating their talking points and not realizing the level of hypocrisy occurring in these bad faith arguments?

I guess if it's the first and you're an evil propagandist, there's not much further to say. But if it's the second one and you're getting the talking points you're using from elsewhere, I would strongly encourage you to think hard about the source you're using for these and realizing that it's tricking you by feeding you stories that are systematically misrepresenting the differences between the two parties.

[rogue06]

CD, I have been noticing a pattern in the topics you focus on in this forum. You take the topics that Republicans are worst on, and that are major reasons people vote Democratic, and find instances of Democrats doing those things at tiny little bit and then make a big deal of how Democrats are doing that thing and ignore that Republicans do it way, way, way worse.

I'm curious, is this a conscious propaganda strategy on your part, where your strategy is to try accusing the opposition of the very thing your own side does way worse, in order to try and deliberately mislead people about the differences between the parties, and trick them into thinking the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans on these issues? Or are you being yourself duped by a particular news source you like to watch, that is itself using this strategy, and you are just gullibly repeating their talking points and not realizing the level of hypocrisy occurring in these bad faith arguments?

I guess if it's the first and you're an evil propagandist, there's not much further to say. But if it's the second one and you're getting the talking points you're using from elsewhere, I would strongly encourage you to think hard about the source you're using for these and realizing that it's tricking you by feeding you stories that are systematically misrepresenting the differences between the two parties.

As you've been repeatedly shown after you continue to pretend that Republicans are the ones getting all the money from this or that source (whether from billionaires, major corporations, foreign contributors...) that in this century it is actually the Democrats who are the ones getting the lion's share of such money. The first two shifted majorly under the Clintons and, AFAICT, the latter has pretty much been the case for a long time

Shall we do this again?