The Libertarian candidate running for a Front Range Colorado congressional seat is dropping out and backing the Republican contender in a move that could bolster the GOP’s chances of flipping…
So he’s a shill or just as dumb as I assume most libertarian voters are. Tear down the government and what do you get? Billion-dollar corporations with a lengthy history of fucking over laborers, buying out or squashing start-up competitors, and rearranging assets to avoid paying restitution to customers they straight up killed. Yeah, real utopia that sounds like.
It never occurred to OP that you might be referring to the Libertarian in OP’s article that’s dropping out of the race in CD8 to endorse the Republican to avoid spoiling it to the Democrat. I find that shit funny…
You are right, that did not occur to me because he mentioned “shill” and that term is usually used for online users (in my experience).
But yes, you’re right, it could be that the person I responded to was not talking about me! I’ll edit my response to incorporate this feedback. Thank you!
I’m not libertarian, but I personally don’t feel having someone outside the current duopoly would make the government weaker. I respect and support your right to your opinion, I just don’t agree with it.
So he’s a shill or just as dumb as I assume most libertarian voters are.
I’m not a libertarian though. I’m actually a socialist. In fact, I created and mod a socialist community here on Lemmy.world.
I didn’t write the article. I just posted it. Not sure why you think that makes me a libertarian. If you have a problem with the article or if you think it’s incorrect, please write to the news org or the editor of the news org.
I’ve only posted it. I had no say in it’s creation. Please refer to the disclaimer I posted regarding the article. Thank you!
EDIT: Someone has posted that the OP was not referring to me, but someone in the article. So my bad! I’ll keep my comment here for reference tho!
This is a political news community, and the article I shared is political news. Do you feel that this article shouldn’t be allowed in this political news community?
you are not posting 99.99% of all the possible political news articles. Why did you choose this one, Or the other ones that you do post ?
I am not in charge of posting every news article on the web, friend.
I read this one, thought it was interesting, and I posted it. I’m just posting this article that’s already available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy—I didn’t write it, just sharing it for discussion.
I believe the content fits this community’s guidelines, and if you feel otherwise, the mods are available. Thank you!
LOL, dude, let me tell you this approach is very transparent and doesn’t make you look clever.
Everyone knows you have editorial agency and has observed that you have a very narrow filter for what you do choose to post. You have taken action to become a high-volume poster in a small community. It’s obvious what your motivations are supposed to be on a surface level, and people are assuming what they are on a deeper/hidden level. Being unwilling to own up to at least the surface level, and saying that you just see random things and republish them, strengthens the assumption of the hidden motive.
I will be transparent: growing support for the candidates you are taking intentful action to specifically promote will result in an outcome counter to my goals and the goals of many people “left of center”, even far left of center. I believe they are counter to the goals of the “shallow level you” as well. You have certainly heard this many times. So it strengthens the idea that the “hidden you” is the real one.
Retreating to feigned ignorance or obtuseness doesn’t make the case regarding your motives - it weakens it.
If you really don’t “get” why your activity has led to comparisons with bad-faith actors who seek to split support for the political left-of-center in the US, then just take it as a given - the response from the community, who has come to know you, should be proof of the probability of that comparison.
At the same time, when people (such as me) respond to the basis of the article or the political effect of support for the candidates you select to promote, you go on a tangent about “censorship” or a meta-discussion about forum rules, often with a boilerplate response. This also makes you look bad.
I generally don’t assume people are stupid, and when I assume that you aren’t stupid either, it is easy to start wondering about the seemingly intentionally obtuse behavior.
As I have, I will continue to push back against support for spoiler candidates. That’s a fair use for this forum - if you go off putting words in my mouth, I will call you out for the bad-faith argument - also a fair use of this forum.
The other participants here are not stupid either - I would personally stop behaving as though they are.
The vast majority of what I post in Lemmy is to socialist communities, which is aligned with my interests and values.
And I’m fully within my rights to post what I want to this political news community. If you or anyone else doesn’t agree with the content I share, that’s totally fine; I respect your right to your opinion.
However, that doesn’t mean I’m going to change what I post simply because it’s not popular or aligned with your political goals. I post what I believe is interesting and worth discussing, regardless of whether it’s well-received by everyone.
As for motives, I’m simply sharing articles and political news that I find interesting. As I’ve noted several times. I also posted a disclaimer when I posted the article in an attempt to stave off some of the angrier posters.
If that conflicts with the goals of others here, that’s the nature of political discourse.
It’s not about being intentionally obtuse or acting in bad faith. I’m here to engage with the content and conversation just like anyone else, and I’m not going to shy away from expressing my views or sharing articles just because they don’t fit neatly into someone else’s political framework.
That’s what this forum is for—debate and diverse perspectives.
I will continue being myself and posting content that I find interesting and that fits the theme of this political news community. It’s not my role to prove anything to you. I’ve given my opinion. You can accept it or not.
If you feel the content is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that created the article. If you feel the articles I’ve posted don’t fit the spirit of this community, feel free to contact the mods.
So he’s a shill or just as dumb as I assume most libertarian voters are. Tear down the government and what do you get? Billion-dollar corporations with a lengthy history of fucking over laborers, buying out or squashing start-up competitors, and rearranging assets to avoid paying restitution to customers they straight up killed. Yeah, real utopia that sounds like.
It never occurred to OP that you might be referring to the Libertarian in OP’s article that’s dropping out of the race in CD8 to endorse the Republican to avoid spoiling it to the Democrat. I find that shit funny…
You are right, that did not occur to me because he mentioned “shill” and that term is usually used for online users (in my experience).
But yes, you’re right, it could be that the person I responded to was not talking about me! I’ll edit my response to incorporate this feedback. Thank you!
Well, to be honest, that seems to be exactly what the current duopoly is doing too.
And a weaker government won’t make any of that better.
I’m not libertarian, but I personally don’t feel having someone outside the current duopoly would make the government weaker. I respect and support your right to your opinion, I just don’t agree with it.
I’m not a libertarian though. I’m actually a socialist. In fact, I created and mod a socialist community here on Lemmy.world.
I didn’t write the article. I just posted it. Not sure why you think that makes me a libertarian. If you have a problem with the article or if you think it’s incorrect, please write to the news org or the editor of the news org.
I’ve only posted it. I had no say in it’s creation. Please refer to the disclaimer I posted regarding the article. Thank you!
EDIT: Someone has posted that the OP was not referring to me, but someone in the article. So my bad! I’ll keep my comment here for reference tho!
Why did you post it?
This is a political news community, and the article I shared is political news. Do you feel that this article shouldn’t be allowed in this political news community?
you are not posting 99.99% of all the possible political news articles. Why did you choose this one, Or the other ones that you do post ?
I am not in charge of posting every news article on the web, friend.
I read this one, thought it was interesting, and I posted it. I’m just posting this article that’s already available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy—I didn’t write it, just sharing it for discussion.
I believe the content fits this community’s guidelines, and if you feel otherwise, the mods are available. Thank you!
LOL, dude, let me tell you this approach is very transparent and doesn’t make you look clever.
Everyone knows you have editorial agency and has observed that you have a very narrow filter for what you do choose to post. You have taken action to become a high-volume poster in a small community. It’s obvious what your motivations are supposed to be on a surface level, and people are assuming what they are on a deeper/hidden level. Being unwilling to own up to at least the surface level, and saying that you just see random things and republish them, strengthens the assumption of the hidden motive.
I will be transparent: growing support for the candidates you are taking intentful action to specifically promote will result in an outcome counter to my goals and the goals of many people “left of center”, even far left of center. I believe they are counter to the goals of the “shallow level you” as well. You have certainly heard this many times. So it strengthens the idea that the “hidden you” is the real one.
Retreating to feigned ignorance or obtuseness doesn’t make the case regarding your motives - it weakens it.
If you really don’t “get” why your activity has led to comparisons with bad-faith actors who seek to split support for the political left-of-center in the US, then just take it as a given - the response from the community, who has come to know you, should be proof of the probability of that comparison.
At the same time, when people (such as me) respond to the basis of the article or the political effect of support for the candidates you select to promote, you go on a tangent about “censorship” or a meta-discussion about forum rules, often with a boilerplate response. This also makes you look bad.
I generally don’t assume people are stupid, and when I assume that you aren’t stupid either, it is easy to start wondering about the seemingly intentionally obtuse behavior.
As I have, I will continue to push back against support for spoiler candidates. That’s a fair use for this forum - if you go off putting words in my mouth, I will call you out for the bad-faith argument - also a fair use of this forum.
The other participants here are not stupid either - I would personally stop behaving as though they are.
The vast majority of what I post in Lemmy is to socialist communities, which is aligned with my interests and values.
And I’m fully within my rights to post what I want to this political news community. If you or anyone else doesn’t agree with the content I share, that’s totally fine; I respect your right to your opinion.
However, that doesn’t mean I’m going to change what I post simply because it’s not popular or aligned with your political goals. I post what I believe is interesting and worth discussing, regardless of whether it’s well-received by everyone.
As for motives, I’m simply sharing articles and political news that I find interesting. As I’ve noted several times. I also posted a disclaimer when I posted the article in an attempt to stave off some of the angrier posters.
If that conflicts with the goals of others here, that’s the nature of political discourse.
It’s not about being intentionally obtuse or acting in bad faith. I’m here to engage with the content and conversation just like anyone else, and I’m not going to shy away from expressing my views or sharing articles just because they don’t fit neatly into someone else’s political framework.
That’s what this forum is for—debate and diverse perspectives.
I will continue being myself and posting content that I find interesting and that fits the theme of this political news community. It’s not my role to prove anything to you. I’ve given my opinion. You can accept it or not.
If you feel the content is inaccurate, please feel free to contact the news org that created the article. If you feel the articles I’ve posted don’t fit the spirit of this community, feel free to contact the mods.
What about these articles makes them interesting to you?