No, they raise tension. Then you draw it down by giving your opponent an out that is in line with your argument.

@DrSammyD Depends on your Priorities. Instant Gratification and interfere with long term goals!

Or is it about enforcing the tyranny of a technocratic elite that just happens to lean center?

heh

I got to get back and wrap up some trades... The bottom line is personal attacks are not ideal and should be avoided. I can imagine how me calling someone and idiot gives them an "out"... but whatever not a giant issue

You give them an out from being an idiot. It's like asking for more than you want and then walking it back to your actual position.

But more emotional than argumentative

Soapboxing or Grandstanding?

Neither. Persuasion. Make em think that your position was their idea.

Most everybody on this board does similarly.

Yes, they do that with arguments, I do it with insults. It's faster

I combine insults with arguments

But I've been asked to refrain

Instant Gratification

Not sure how long term goals are harmed by moving people's position closer to your own.

I know.

Subservience under a technological system, is a much more efficient way to achieve promlegation of one's will on others.

Systems of technology by their very nature are authoritarian.

I suppose I do it for fun.

Fun and prophet?

I need more phone juice 🍋

Howdy from Texas y'all 👋

Play instruments

Texas RN

Poor Trigger Control!....lol

@Recalibar here's the thing attorneys typically won't take junk cases even if you pay them.

Kelly's team just posted their reply to the Response: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20A98/163095/20201208154754981_Reply%20Brief%20in%20Support%20of%20Emergency%20Application%20for%20Writ%20of%20Injunction%20with%20Supplemental%20Appendix.pdf

What's the end game?

And yes a proven track record of junk?

What about state attorney generals?

Normally with no political ax to grind or gain, no.

We have the former in the latter

Hey yall what's the deal with TX suing PA and like I forgot, WI and like 5 other states ❓

The latter for sure.

anyhow just thought I'd ask, enjoying yalls convo

Apparently electorate desires are moving the needle, too bad it doesn't happen typically.

They argue the potential for fraud undermines the constitution and the will of their voters, and that the allegations should be investigated before the election moves forward, because the will of their voters are undermined by fraud in the system.

colloquialisms are strong with @skeeterburke.

It may be theater, of sorts... If the plan is to challenge the electors sent from these states in January in order to prevent Biden from reaching 270, this is potentially part of making that case. They will petition the US SC to invalidate those election results, with little chance of success. Then, when January 7 rolls around, they will challenge the votes and point to being forced to do so because SCOTUS failed to act.

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-pennsylvania-tom-wolf-courts-0b7005328243eeca23f8bc3368549879?fbclid=IwAR3PQNlrJm5hAICfBYlVWQv3yt1GMIdlh0JIX9Jjajtp3Q7j086s5tLR6wA

What's your prediction in terms of outcome?