3 ms·

Any analysis that relies on Warren will be "unfalsifiable". We don't have to watch the news much to realize that they're not afraid of Warren. Is that because t

Any analysis that relies on Warren will be "unfalsifiable". We don't have to watch the news much to realize that they're not afraid of Warren. Is that because they think she's fibbing about how she's going to crack down on the 1%? Maybe that's part of it, but the bigger factor is that they know Trump won't lose to "Pocahontas". The coverage she gets is very different than what e.g. Sanders or Gabbard get, because they're real in a way that neither Trump nor any opponent he has faced has been. (Your back-and-forth about "few" vs "some" vs "1%" or whatever just proves the point about oligarchy.)

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
> (Your back-and-forth about "few" vs "some" vs "1%" or whatever just proves the point about oligarchy.) I don't think that it proves any such thing, except apparently in your mind. Nor do I think that I was going "back and forth" between "the few" and "some". The 1%, perhaps, if you accept Warren's plan as targeting them. By the way, this oligarchy that you think rule - are they more or fewer than the 1%? I think that your point about Sanders is rather a large concession on your part. You seem to be saying that "the oligarchy" are concerned that Sanders might win, and therefore are orchestrating press coverage against him. But if they are concerned that he might win, then they clearly don't rule. Otherwise, they would have no such concern.
- jessaustin 7y ago
  Well, they haven't assassinated him yet... you seem sort of eager to shit on my hope. The last three presidents ran for office promising no more stupid foreign wars. Are you trying to force me to admit that democracy in USA is a sham? [EDIT:] Sorry, it's clear to me now that this is what you intended with your whole "how few is few?" routine. Clearly you don't consider it "oligarchy" when 51% of votes are used as toilet paper.
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    I deny you the right to put words in my mouth. Please stop misrepresenting my position and my words, trying to make it sound like they support your ideas. They don't.

AnimalMuppet 7y ago

> (Your back-and-forth about "few" vs "some" vs "1%" or whatever just proves the point about oligarchy.) I don't think that it proves any such thing, except apparently in your mind. Nor do I think that I was going "back and forth" between "the few" and "some". The 1%, perhaps, if you accept Warren's plan as targeting them. By the way, this oligarchy that you think rule - are they more or fewer than the 1%? I think that your point about Sanders is rather a large concession on your part. You seem to be saying that "the oligarchy" are concerned that Sanders might win, and therefore are orchestrating press coverage against him. But if they are concerned that he might win, then they clearly don't rule. Otherwise, they would have no such concern.

jessaustin 7y ago
Well, they haven't assassinated him yet... you seem sort of eager to shit on my hope. The last three presidents ran for office promising no more stupid foreign wars. Are you trying to force me to admit that democracy in USA is a sham? [EDIT:] Sorry, it's clear to me now that this is what you intended with your whole "how few is few?" routine. Clearly you don't consider it "oligarchy" when 51% of votes are used as toilet paper.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  I deny you the right to put words in my mouth. Please stop misrepresenting my position and my words, trying to make it sound like they support your ideas. They don't.