3 ms·

Did you reply to the wrong comment? Your (knee-jerk?) characterization is the opposite of what that comment is saying.

• GavinMcG 6y ago
  What are you talking about? The comment dismissed what I had said about it mattering who we elect, in a shallow and narrowly-focused way. My characterization is indeed the opposite, because I disagree with the comment's premise. That's why I replied.
  • alentist 6y ago
    Their comment: Things were bad during Obama's reign, as they were under Trump. Biden won't bring change, unless systemic change will be implemented. Your response: I think your knee-jerk focus on who the president is (and denying the possibility of change) demonstrates what I was saying: the rhetoric has convinced people that it doesn't matter and it's all some national team sport.
    • GavinMcG 6y ago
      Naming the three most recent presidents and denying that any of them did or could change things was meant as a direct counter to my claim that it matters who we elect. I replied by pointing out that "who we elect" isn't limited to the presidency. It is entirely useless for you to quote each of us without clarifying what you've misinterpreted.
      • alentist 6y ago
        "focus on who the president is" is the opposite of what they said. "denying the possibility of change" is the opposite of what they did.