There it is again “senility”. Everyone working with him says he’s sharp, but you just gotta get it in. Would I prefer younger? Sure. But he’s not senile JFC. Lack of charisma? The guy presents absolutely fine and does great work. How much does one need to appeal to emotions.
you haven’t been paying attention, have you? the entire republican platform is an appeal to their emotions. It’s why it’s successful. appeals to emotion are vastly more successful than appeals to logic or reason, even if they’re wrong. Our brains are literally hardwired to consider emotion before reason, to react on emotion before logic; and triggering the emotional response to manipulate people is an entire field of science in neuropsychology. (and probably one of the best funded areas of research…)
This “we need someone charismatic and then we’ll vote” is the emotion for the supposed logical, informed, left wing voter, who votes based on policy (or lack of policy when they protest no vote).
Funny because I think it’s the other way around, people screaming “but but but charisma! But but but old!”
I thought maybe it was someone else I just told but no it’s you. These are the supposed logical people waiting for the supposed logical platform. But no, they want emotions. Notice that doesn’t add up?
And you’re still trying to sneak it in. Biden is just fine charismatically.
Not the guy you’re discussing with, but on this rare occasion I’ll toot my own horn for once: If only the average American were as intelligent — or at least informed — as me. Unfortunately one must get on their level, sometimes. Besides, having a logical platform and having the charismatic youthful platform are not mutually-exclusive things.
Welcome to America, where everything from high school to your career prospects is basically a popularity contest as opposed to a formal job interview based on legitimate experience and qualifications.
They who can thread the needle between populism and substantive policy win.
I’m just happy Donald is the nominee again because I don’t think Biden could’ve beat anyone else.
Well you’re just the original guy that tried the senile bit.
What I see throughout this site is these supposed leftists who say they are so well informed, and so well thought, who know all about policies, and what to do, and who think and think and think, and determine that the best course of action is to protest vote. And then they turn around and say “but i want charisma for ma emotions”. Yeah it doesn’t add up.
Oh yeah let me repeat myself to be very clear: I think not voting or a protest vote or a third-party or independent vote is downright stupid. I think anyone suggesting this is either a right-wing operative as it only benefits them, or they’re very naive and likely a newcomer to politics. who also lacks an understanding of risk/reward analytics.
Absolutely, at this point we should all vote for Joe Biden.
All I’m saying is that unfortunately you and I are far-and-above average in terms of political knowledge and civic engagement. Most people lack the depth of understanding to look at things logically and so must go off intuition and emotion as shortcuts. So to some extent, I think a party would be crazy not to put a heavy emphasis on this. Unfortunately it benefits the GOP more because of the nature of their deeply-ignorant and gullible and griftable base.
I never once criticized Biden for being old. So no, that was not me.
And I’m trying to side step charisma; you can be uncharismaric and win- but you can’t just appeal to logic and reason- even to logical and reasonable people- and expect to win against a campaign that’s all about emotion.
You have to get people excited. That’s how you win. Not by browbeating your voters, not by ignoring them, and sitting around expecting people to vote because you’re a democrat and that other guy is awful.
You have to get people excited and motivated. You have to persuade them to vote, and no, Biden is not entitled to anyone’s vote.
There are a fair amount of things Biden has done, that are good. You want to get votes for Biden, talk about that, talk about things he’s trying to do right now.
Attacking and antagonizing doesn’t motivate people to vote- at best it does the opposite, at worst it motivates them to vote for Trump.
TL/DR? Even if it’s not your intention, you’re making it worse.
P.S. telling people how to vote is kind of… a thing fascists do…
Well said. Both Hillary and Biden had very lower voter-enthusiasm when people were surveyed… Even for dyed-in-the-wool Democrats. People like Obama or Bernie had high voter enthusiasm. If only institutions followed suit…
I didn’t say you, I said “people screaming” about old. But you are screaming about charisma.
The people that I see all over this site and who I’m referring to are the supposed logical people, who want the logical platform, and the logical (presumably left) policies, and then they will logically vote accordingly, and until then they will logically not vote because logic. They present themselves as the end all of logic.
But then they turn around and say “but I want charisma for my emotions”. That is what I’m saying. Do you see how that doesn’t add up?
For someone that seemed so offended that I said “people scream old” seeming to think that was aimed at you, you sure throw an absolute ton of stuff in my direction that I didn’t say (including your TLDR prod and PS attack). Like wow. I’m not going to throw them all back because honestly you seem intent on twisting and turning, because:
I said it pretty clear at the start “This “we need someone charismatic and then we’ll vote” is the emotion for the supposed logical, informed, left wing voter, who votes based on policy (or lack of policy when they protest no vote).” but you went off on all directions. Ciao.
I didn’t say you, I said “people screaming” about old. But you are screaming about charisma.
-you.
Funny because I think it’s the other way around, people screaming “but but but charisma! But but but old!”
I thought maybe it was someone else I just told but no it’s you. These are the supposed logical people waiting for the supposed logical platform. But no, they want emotions. Notice that doesn’t add up?
And you’re still trying to sneak it in. Biden is just fine charismatically.
-Also you. (emphasis is mine, though.)
Also, that’s not at all what I’m trying to do and if you’ve been reading my comment you would know that. What the “he’s not charismatic” complaint really boils down to is “I’m not motivated to vote for him.” him actually being charismatic or not is not the issue. the issue is, he’s not engaging voters and motivating them to vote for him; and neither is his campaign.
However, emotions have value. It appears that without emotions to motivate and push us, we would be passive and do nothing. Decisions are very much informed by our emotional state since this is what emotions are designed to do. Emotions quickly condense an experience, and evaluate it to inform our decision, so we can rapidly respond to the situation.
While emotions serve to direct us, they are driven by our automatic survival nature. As such, most of the time emotions communicate their messages below our level of awareness. It is important to note that because of their speed and survival purpose, emotions are not particularly accurate. Their speed and effectiveness compensate for what they lack in being specific and detailed. This is why the emotional system provides many false alarms, which requires us to reevaluate our response and check if it is appropriate to the particular situation.
(Emphasis mine,)
It’s quite literally hardwired into our brain to be emotional. It’s a matter of survival; your stress responses are keyed to force quick decisions- and frequently unconscious ones. “Fight, Flight, Freeze or Fawn”. When you come in hot, demanding we vote a certain way, you’re triggering an emotional reaction- and it’s not a happy one.
The ability to think can override the emotional state. The more you spend time thinking and bring your cognitive processes to bear … you have a shot at basically saying, ‘No, I think I’m going to pass,’ even though that wasn’t your first inclination.
Sure, that articles is about not getting suckered on a black friday sale, but persuading people to a vote a certain way is the same science.
Abortion is an easy point for Democrats because it’s inherently emotional, right? When we talk about women having ectopic pregnancies, people aren’t talking about it with clinical sterility. they’re talking about pain, and fear, and hurt. And when you’re talking about women dying, the people you’re talking to aren’t seeing statistics, they’re hearing the pain and the fear; and they’re seeing their wives, their mothers, sisters, or themselves; and that hits all sorts of emotions.
It’s evocative. It’s poignant. you can unprime prior emotions about it; by asking open questions. The goal isn’t to immediately get an agreement, it might take days, or months. It took my parents years to break the religious brainwashing about it… but by using open questions to get them thinking about it, rather than feeling about it, eventually they came around. More to it, questions can provide emotional priming to encourage a desired decision while you provide the relevant evidence to support that decision. That, is how you influence people.
The Bernie and Obama campaigns understood this. Take a look at the style differences.
Obama was all about Hope and Change, and fighting for it. He gave people hope, and promised to work to a brighter future. Hope is probably one of the most potent emotions out there. Just a little can topple empires. Bernie’s campaign was downright authentic. He cared, he gave people a sense of… something I’ve only seen from 2 other Boomers in my life. (okay, so Bernie is not a boomer, he’s silent generation.) He made us feel powerful and heard. And he promised- and not just a bullshit promise- to help, and empowered us to seek change.
The vast majority of my interactions with boomers… is condescension, authoritarianism and straight up bullshit. Most everyone who is in that generation fights an uphill battle with me. Because of that. It triggers an emotional response. that emotional response gets stronger when they fail to respect that I’m a fucking adult and can make rational choices. It then gets even stronger when they get angry and start shouting. basically, by the time we get to that point, I’m no where near a place where I can even hear what they’re saying.
Now, compare the Hillary campaign. Entitlement. Arrogance. Bullshit. Condescension. I remember a conversation with one of her organizers here… the gist of the conversation was basically that I was sexist because I liked Bernie better. yup. very persuasive.
Motivating people to vote for biden isn’t about fear mongering, we know trump is bad. we know he’s awful, corrupt, stupid, and a raging fucking fascist. We don’t need to be told that. we don’t need to be told that he’s going to kill everyone who doesn’t agree with him- Trump tells us that enough on his own.
It’s about getting them excited to vote for Biden. Biden himself could be a limp noodle. but somebody coming in, saying 'hey I know it’s rough, but here’s what I’m doing to help, and can you maybe help?" would be powerful. “Hey, I’m trying to get [something useful] done in congress… can you call your representatives? your senators? can you help me get [something useful] done?” or even “HEY! so I’m trying to do [something useful], do you have any ideas how we can get [people on board]” Or… I know it’s daring, actually listening to what we have to say about things.
“Why do you think we shouldn’t support Israel?” and then actually listen to the answers. (I mean, it’s pretty fucking obvious, but apparently that one’s gone over his head.)
Hey dude. I can see you’re really passionate about this, you’re not a propagandist or an agitator. You have your ideals and are sticking to them. I can respect that.
But you just wrote a long, detailed, passionate defense of being stupid.
I can tell you’re better than this. You’re obviously not stupid. I insult and jeer at a lot of people on lemmy because they’re fucking idiots, but you are obviously not one. You can be better than this. You don’t have to restrict yourself to voting based on vibes or Tiktok memes. I believe you have the mental capacity to actually do a few google searched (in incognito mode to trick the algorithm) and see what Biden is doing and has done. I believe you have the mental capacity to ignore the propaganda about “senility” or whatever else, if you choose to. Or the idea that Biden for some reason decides to not listen to his constituents.
At the very least, I think you have the capacity to recognize that a lot of the anti Biden people are at best EXTREMELY politically uninformed and wonder if it’s a good idea to take cues from them.
A whopping 66-77% of Americans polled again and again view Biden as too old to be President. So in this respect, I’m just reflecting a widespread concern of what millions upon millions of people see and feel.
His staff, who must literally kiss ass to maintain the privilege of working a job in the White House and like warfare will give no quarter to any argument the GOP makes no matter how true it is - is NOT a good counter-argument to make. It’s as outlandish as the Republican senators coming out of the meeting yesterday saying Trump is sharp as ever.
Even the likes of The Daily Show to SNL mocks this aspect of Biden for good reason.
Blaming for the stutter works only insofar as you’re old enough to remember Biden as VP under Obama in 2008.
NOW, here’s the thing: less time needs to be spent trying to shore up the bullshit argument that Biden is “sharp as ever,” and more about pivoting to Trump’s incoherent rambles and his own age. Acknowledging Biden’s age is actually a great one-two punch to use for anyone on the fence because it gives you a point where both can agree: “Yeah, I agree Biden is showing his age clearly. No differently than McConnell… No differently than Donald (give examples), but I think Biden is at least a more compassionate person… And say, while we’re at it, can we agree we should have an age limit if we already have an age-minimum on the Presidency?” <clinks-beers and everybody laughs.>
This wasn’t about him being old, this was about you saying “senility” and whoever didn’t believe that had was “head is deep in the sand”. But when I call that out, you have to pivot that to old.
Ok I should have said people that meet him say he’s sharp. They are not beholden to him. One guy met him said he remember meeting his mom like a decade prior and remembered her and all the details. Fuck that’s better than I do. Now in case you say “but that’s not work”, but yes also the people that work with him say he’s sharp too. Seems to me you just want to get the ‘senile’ bit out any way you can.
Wow and now you’re trying to ignore that he does in fact have a stutter? Ok that’s about it, you’ve shown you’re dead set on vilification no matter what. Stutters come and go, how prepared you are for a speech, etc. It’s not consistent that never changes one bit.
Thanks for showing the world that your mission is to bad mouth Biden. You sneak in “senile” then pivot when called out. You say everything good must be bootlickers. And you preemptively try to ignore that he has a stutter. I’m probably not going to reply anymore.
Geriatric, old, senile — same thing for all intents of this discussion. Yes, they are head-deep in the sand.
Hell just watch the clips from this Daily Show skit of Biden.. I can tell you three things: (1) Obama never did this, (2) Biden never did this during Obama’s first term in office, and (3) this is clearly a sign of senility no different than McConnell just freezing during a press conference.
Wow and now you’re trying to ignore that he does in fact have a stutter?
Not what I said. Work on reading-comprehension, please. Try again and stop putting words in my mouth.
Also I didn’t “sneak” senile in anywhere — I said it quite in the open, really.
Hell just watch the clips from this Daily Show skit of Biden.. I can tell you three things: (1) Obama never did this, (2) Biden never did this during Obama’s first term in office, and (3) this is clearly a sign of senility no different than McConnell just freezing during a press conference.
There it is again “senility”. Everyone working with him says he’s sharp, but you just gotta get it in. Would I prefer younger? Sure. But he’s not senile JFC. Lack of charisma? The guy presents absolutely fine and does great work. How much does one need to appeal to emotions.
you haven’t been paying attention, have you? the entire republican platform is an appeal to their emotions. It’s why it’s successful. appeals to emotion are vastly more successful than appeals to logic or reason, even if they’re wrong. Our brains are literally hardwired to consider emotion before reason, to react on emotion before logic; and triggering the emotional response to manipulate people is an entire field of science in neuropsychology. (and probably one of the best funded areas of research…)
This “we need someone charismatic and then we’ll vote” is the emotion for the supposed logical, informed, left wing voter, who votes based on policy (or lack of policy when they protest no vote).
So you just like to scream at people while ignoring human nature,
Okay, good to know. I’m sure it’ll work out fine if you just continue screaming at people…
Funny because I think it’s the other way around, people screaming “but but but charisma! But but but old!”
I thought maybe it was someone else I just told but no it’s you. These are the supposed logical people waiting for the supposed logical platform. But no, they want emotions. Notice that doesn’t add up?
And you’re still trying to sneak it in. Biden is just fine charismatically.
Not the guy you’re discussing with, but on this rare occasion I’ll toot my own horn for once: If only the average American were as intelligent — or at least informed — as me. Unfortunately one must get on their level, sometimes. Besides, having a logical platform and having the charismatic youthful platform are not mutually-exclusive things.
Welcome to America, where everything from high school to your career prospects is basically a popularity contest as opposed to a formal job interview based on legitimate experience and qualifications.
They who can thread the needle between populism and substantive policy win.
I’m just happy Donald is the nominee again because I don’t think Biden could’ve beat anyone else.
Well you’re just the original guy that tried the senile bit.
What I see throughout this site is these supposed leftists who say they are so well informed, and so well thought, who know all about policies, and what to do, and who think and think and think, and determine that the best course of action is to protest vote. And then they turn around and say “but i want charisma for ma emotions”. Yeah it doesn’t add up.
That’s who I’m talking to on this site.
Oh yeah let me repeat myself to be very clear: I think not voting or a protest vote or a third-party or independent vote is downright stupid. I think anyone suggesting this is either a right-wing operative as it only benefits them, or they’re very naive and likely a newcomer to politics. who also lacks an understanding of risk/reward analytics.
Absolutely, at this point we should all vote for Joe Biden.
All I’m saying is that unfortunately you and I are far-and-above average in terms of political knowledge and civic engagement. Most people lack the depth of understanding to look at things logically and so must go off intuition and emotion as shortcuts. So to some extent, I think a party would be crazy not to put a heavy emphasis on this. Unfortunately it benefits the GOP more because of the nature of their deeply-ignorant and gullible and griftable base.
Repeat? You never said that in the first place. You’re still trying to sneak in this idea that he’s not charismatic, when he basically is.
Yeah you showed who you are in the other reply. Ciao.
I never once criticized Biden for being old. So no, that was not me.
And I’m trying to side step charisma; you can be uncharismaric and win- but you can’t just appeal to logic and reason- even to logical and reasonable people- and expect to win against a campaign that’s all about emotion.
You have to get people excited. That’s how you win. Not by browbeating your voters, not by ignoring them, and sitting around expecting people to vote because you’re a democrat and that other guy is awful.
You have to get people excited and motivated. You have to persuade them to vote, and no, Biden is not entitled to anyone’s vote.
There are a fair amount of things Biden has done, that are good. You want to get votes for Biden, talk about that, talk about things he’s trying to do right now.
Attacking and antagonizing doesn’t motivate people to vote- at best it does the opposite, at worst it motivates them to vote for Trump.
TL/DR? Even if it’s not your intention, you’re making it worse.
P.S. telling people how to vote is kind of… a thing fascists do…
Well said. Both Hillary and Biden had very lower voter-enthusiasm when people were surveyed… Even for dyed-in-the-wool Democrats. People like Obama or Bernie had high voter enthusiasm. If only institutions followed suit…
I didn’t say you, I said “people screaming” about old. But you are screaming about charisma.
The people that I see all over this site and who I’m referring to are the supposed logical people, who want the logical platform, and the logical (presumably left) policies, and then they will logically vote accordingly, and until then they will logically not vote because logic. They present themselves as the end all of logic.
But then they turn around and say “but I want charisma for my emotions”. That is what I’m saying. Do you see how that doesn’t add up?
For someone that seemed so offended that I said “people scream old” seeming to think that was aimed at you, you sure throw an absolute ton of stuff in my direction that I didn’t say (including your TLDR prod and PS attack). Like wow. I’m not going to throw them all back because honestly you seem intent on twisting and turning, because:
I said it pretty clear at the start “This “we need someone charismatic and then we’ll vote” is the emotion for the supposed logical, informed, left wing voter, who votes based on policy (or lack of policy when they protest no vote).” but you went off on all directions. Ciao.
-you.
-Also you. (emphasis is mine, though.)
Also, that’s not at all what I’m trying to do and if you’ve been reading my comment you would know that. What the “he’s not charismatic” complaint really boils down to is “I’m not motivated to vote for him.” him actually being charismatic or not is not the issue. the issue is, he’s not engaging voters and motivating them to vote for him; and neither is his campaign.
as for emotions… what I’m trying to tell you is, that people make emotional decisions. You have to engage on an emotional level., specifically:
(Emphasis mine,)
It’s quite literally hardwired into our brain to be emotional. It’s a matter of survival; your stress responses are keyed to force quick decisions- and frequently unconscious ones. “Fight, Flight, Freeze or Fawn”. When you come in hot, demanding we vote a certain way, you’re triggering an emotional reaction- and it’s not a happy one.
Even the most rationally-minded people in the world are still fighting an uphill battle against emotions. As a person whose entire career is researching this, and how to manipulate us into making a bad decision says: "The human brain has essentially evolved to feel first and think next,"and in that article, Carolyn also says:
Sure, that articles is about not getting suckered on a black friday sale, but persuading people to a vote a certain way is the same science.
Abortion is an easy point for Democrats because it’s inherently emotional, right? When we talk about women having ectopic pregnancies, people aren’t talking about it with clinical sterility. they’re talking about pain, and fear, and hurt. And when you’re talking about women dying, the people you’re talking to aren’t seeing statistics, they’re hearing the pain and the fear; and they’re seeing their wives, their mothers, sisters, or themselves; and that hits all sorts of emotions.
It’s evocative. It’s poignant. you can unprime prior emotions about it; by asking open questions. The goal isn’t to immediately get an agreement, it might take days, or months. It took my parents years to break the religious brainwashing about it… but by using open questions to get them thinking about it, rather than feeling about it, eventually they came around. More to it, questions can provide emotional priming to encourage a desired decision while you provide the relevant evidence to support that decision. That, is how you influence people.
The Bernie and Obama campaigns understood this. Take a look at the style differences.
Obama was all about Hope and Change, and fighting for it. He gave people hope, and promised to work to a brighter future. Hope is probably one of the most potent emotions out there. Just a little can topple empires. Bernie’s campaign was downright authentic. He cared, he gave people a sense of… something I’ve only seen from 2 other Boomers in my life. (okay, so Bernie is not a boomer, he’s silent generation.) He made us feel powerful and heard. And he promised- and not just a bullshit promise- to help, and empowered us to seek change.
The vast majority of my interactions with boomers… is condescension, authoritarianism and straight up bullshit. Most everyone who is in that generation fights an uphill battle with me. Because of that. It triggers an emotional response. that emotional response gets stronger when they fail to respect that I’m a fucking adult and can make rational choices. It then gets even stronger when they get angry and start shouting. basically, by the time we get to that point, I’m no where near a place where I can even hear what they’re saying.
Now, compare the Hillary campaign. Entitlement. Arrogance. Bullshit. Condescension. I remember a conversation with one of her organizers here… the gist of the conversation was basically that I was sexist because I liked Bernie better. yup. very persuasive.
Motivating people to vote for biden isn’t about fear mongering, we know trump is bad. we know he’s awful, corrupt, stupid, and a raging fucking fascist. We don’t need to be told that. we don’t need to be told that he’s going to kill everyone who doesn’t agree with him- Trump tells us that enough on his own.
It’s about getting them excited to vote for Biden. Biden himself could be a limp noodle. but somebody coming in, saying 'hey I know it’s rough, but here’s what I’m doing to help, and can you maybe help?" would be powerful. “Hey, I’m trying to get [something useful] done in congress… can you call your representatives? your senators? can you help me get [something useful] done?” or even “HEY! so I’m trying to do [something useful], do you have any ideas how we can get [people on board]” Or… I know it’s daring, actually listening to what we have to say about things.
“Why do you think we shouldn’t support Israel?” and then actually listen to the answers. (I mean, it’s pretty fucking obvious, but apparently that one’s gone over his head.)
Hey dude. I can see you’re really passionate about this, you’re not a propagandist or an agitator. You have your ideals and are sticking to them. I can respect that.
But you just wrote a long, detailed, passionate defense of being stupid.
I can tell you’re better than this. You’re obviously not stupid. I insult and jeer at a lot of people on lemmy because they’re fucking idiots, but you are obviously not one. You can be better than this. You don’t have to restrict yourself to voting based on vibes or Tiktok memes. I believe you have the mental capacity to actually do a few google searched (in incognito mode to trick the algorithm) and see what Biden is doing and has done. I believe you have the mental capacity to ignore the propaganda about “senility” or whatever else, if you choose to. Or the idea that Biden for some reason decides to not listen to his constituents.
At the very least, I think you have the capacity to recognize that a lot of the anti Biden people are at best EXTREMELY politically uninformed and wonder if it’s a good idea to take cues from them.
Okay, dude — Just humor me for a second:
NOW, here’s the thing: less time needs to be spent trying to shore up the bullshit argument that Biden is “sharp as ever,” and more about pivoting to Trump’s incoherent rambles and his own age. Acknowledging Biden’s age is actually a great one-two punch to use for anyone on the fence because it gives you a point where both can agree: “Yeah, I agree Biden is showing his age clearly. No differently than McConnell… No differently than Donald (give examples), but I think Biden is at least a more compassionate person… And say, while we’re at it, can we agree we should have an age limit if we already have an age-minimum on the Presidency?” <clinks-beers and everybody laughs.>
This wasn’t about him being old, this was about you saying “senility” and whoever didn’t believe that had was “head is deep in the sand”. But when I call that out, you have to pivot that to old.
Ok I should have said people that meet him say he’s sharp. They are not beholden to him. One guy met him said he remember meeting his mom like a decade prior and remembered her and all the details. Fuck that’s better than I do. Now in case you say “but that’s not work”, but yes also the people that work with him say he’s sharp too. Seems to me you just want to get the ‘senile’ bit out any way you can.
Wow and now you’re trying to ignore that he does in fact have a stutter? Ok that’s about it, you’ve shown you’re dead set on vilification no matter what. Stutters come and go, how prepared you are for a speech, etc. It’s not consistent that never changes one bit.
Thanks for showing the world that your mission is to bad mouth Biden. You sneak in “senile” then pivot when called out. You say everything good must be bootlickers. And you preemptively try to ignore that he has a stutter. I’m probably not going to reply anymore.
Geriatric, old, senile — same thing for all intents of this discussion. Yes, they are head-deep in the sand.
Hell just watch the clips from this Daily Show skit of Biden.. I can tell you three things: (1) Obama never did this, (2) Biden never did this during Obama’s first term in office, and (3) this is clearly a sign of senility no different than McConnell just freezing during a press conference.
Not what I said. Work on reading-comprehension, please. Try again and stop putting words in my mouth.
Also I didn’t “sneak” senile in anywhere — I said it quite in the open, really.
senile /sē′nīl″, sĕn′īl″/ adjective
Relating to or having diminished cognitive function, as when memory is impaired, because of old age.
Being a disease or condition whose cause is primarily advanced age. “senile cataracts.”
No not the same thing.
And attacks. Ciao.
Yes, that’s the correct use here.
I’ll repeat the deflected:
Hell just watch the clips from this Daily Show skit of Biden.. I can tell you three things: (1) Obama never did this, (2) Biden never did this during Obama’s first term in office, and (3) this is clearly a sign of senility no different than McConnell just freezing during a press conference.
You already attacked, hypocrite. Auf wiedersehen.