• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      The question was:

      How can you organize voters with a district like the Texas 33rd?

      I said “the internet”…

      And now you’re demanding I prove checks notes something else no one else has been talking about?

      Why?

      • bobburger@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 days ago

        What is wrong with you? It’s very clear that the issue that makes organizing in the Texas 33rd is the extreme gerrymandering. What question did you think you were answering when you confidently answered “the interenet”? Were you just saying random shit hoping no one would call you out on your bullshit?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Look, they’re apparently never wrong about anything and when they say “the internet,” they mean it. Fact. End of.

          Edit: and reading below, it’s gone from “you can use the internet to organize to fix a problem like Texas’ third district’s gerrymandering” to “the internet has been used to organize people politically sometimes.” Very helpful and relevant!

      • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        I said “the internet”… And now you’re demanding I prove…

        I asked you to prove your claims. (if you can’t, of course, nobody should believe them). Not something unrelated. But thanks for the

        Red Herring

        red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question.[1] It may be either a logical fallacyor a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion. A red herring may be used intentionally, as in mystery fiction or as part of rhetorical strategies (e.g., in politics), or may be used in argumentation inadvertently.[2]

        Why don’t you just answer the question?

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          How can you organize voters with a district like the Texas 33rd?

          I said “the internet”…

          That was “my claim”.

          That “the Internet” is how you would organize people in a sprawling district because that doesn’t rely on geography and in person meetings. It’s also just how you do shit now.

          Then you asked me:

          Let’s see evidence of “the internet” solving extreme gerrymandering

          And acting that I claimed it could. When I never said that because I was answering a completely different question.

          The only way that makes sense, is if you dont know what me or that other person was talking about.

          • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            That was “my claim”.

            Backed up with nothing but excuses and self-serving bullshit. You have zero evidence to back up your “claims” …

            Blaming me for calling you out and then blaming both me and others for your own actions and their consequences is textbook projection.

            Facing the consequences of your actions is not a state of victimhood