Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is792h4 wrote

Reply to comment by tryin2staysane in The Vulnerability of John Fetterman - Inside this year’s highest-stakes Senate race. by -TheFarce-

I think decent senators do. I don't think he will be one. I hope I'm wrong.

0

tryin2staysane t1_is799ta wrote

What are you basing that on, other than propaganda?

2

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is79rwm wrote

My brain.

Again, I'm voting for him and have donated to his campaign. I'm very unimpressed by his time as Lt Governor and expect the same as a senator.

1

tryin2staysane t1_is7dz5w wrote

>I'm very unimpressed by his time as Lt Governor

Why's that?

2

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is7ijmk wrote

He never did anything, completely inept for a person with higher goals. And judging by recent reports it's because he never actually worked.

1

tryin2staysane t1_is7olkd wrote

How do you mean he never did anything? How much would someone need to show that he did in order for you to admit that isn't accurate?

2

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is7oxde wrote

https://nypost.com/2022/10/06/john-fetterman-kept-light-schedule-as-pa-lieutenant-governor/

So is that inaccurate? What was he doing the rest of the time? He's not working for PennDOT.

1

tryin2staysane t1_is7pc9p wrote

That didn't answer my question even a little bit.

How much would someone need to show that he did in order for you to admit that is inaccurate?

2

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is7pnqj wrote

Is it inaccurate?

1

tryin2staysane t1_is7qagl wrote

How much evidence would need to be shown in order for you to find it inaccurate?

2

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is7tvq0 wrote

So do you not have evidence it's inaccurate?

1

tryin2staysane t1_is7w7sn wrote

I'm asking how much evidence I need to provide. There's no point providing evidence if you're going to say it's not enough.

2

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is7xpz0 wrote

So you can't, is what I'm hearing.

1

tryin2staysane t1_is7yyaa wrote

What a surprise, you're choosing what to hear and ignoring evidence to the contrary. There's no amount of evidence you'll accept to change your mind is what I'm hearing.

2

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is8096n wrote

>and ignoring evidence to the contrary.

#YOU HAVE GIVEN ME NONE.

1

tryin2staysane t1_is80h4n wrote

Because I'm hearing from you that evidence won't matter. I ask how much you need and you refuse to answer. Obviously that means you will refuse to hear anything against your narrative.

2

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is82e02 wrote

I've asked you multiple times, is it inaccurate. You respond with "how much evidence do you need" instead of actual evidence.

Let's start over. Give me literally any evidence he actually did his job. Any.

1

tryin2staysane t1_is8bhom wrote

Any? One constitutionally required parts of his job is being on the Board of Pardons. He has a 100% attendance rate there. There ya go, evidence he did his job. Guess you'll admit you were wrong now.

1

WookieeSteakIsChewie t1_is8gfnc wrote

Great, that's awesome. How often do they meet? Based on what I see on their website it's 4 days once a quarter.

What about the stuff addressed in the article? How he only worked 5 hour days 3 days a week? That doesn't counter that point.

You're just going to say "See, I told you it wasn't enough" but the truth is what you said doesn't counter that article in any way. He attended 16 meetings a year for 4 years. That's not impressive, that's bare minimum.

1

tryin2staysane t1_is8vwj7 wrote

So again I'll ask, what does need to be shown for you to admit your assertion is inaccurate? You asked for one thing, I gave the lowest possible bit of evidence. Tell me what it would take. Or be honest with both of us and admit you don't care if there is evidence to show its inaccurate. You don't like Fetterman because of his policies, and you'll vote for him because he's not Oz. You don't want to be shown that your assumption is wrong because you don't want to have to find an honest reason to dislike him.

0