Sean Mooney

Which "you" is this referring to now?

What is a win on a message board worth?

I assume this post is about "you" (everyone) and not "you" (me). Good try though.

I don't defend liars...I'm not defending you

I appreciate that you don't see the irony of your stance on this when you are making an argument about the dishonesty of the Biden people.

There are pieces there that make it not about a "universal you" and a personal one. You can see them. maybe one day you will actually have your own honest assessment within yourself.

I suggest you re-read some of the comments you made and reassess

I do not believe you are being truthful. I think you know you are not as well but do not want to cede ground.

This is what you said: The article I linked to was in response to: I gave you an article that shows many times it was reported- well before the debate. Maybe you want to rethink what you are saying?

When you say this: and this: that is not about the people performing the acts. that is directed at me. I'm not "inserting myself into it" And it is bullsh!t that you want to try and pretend different. Maybe you can have plausible deniability on the others, but these two are targeted.

I gave you an article that points to a number of pieces written before the debate that talk about Biden decline. You say "That article was written after the debate" and then you give me a Google search where the first few pages (at least) are from after the debate as well. Dude- you were directly addressing me in those comments using "you." And then after delivering 5 comments that are directly addressing me and saying "you need to self reflect," "your decision making is wrong" "you seem smart," "you need to change how you take in information to win" you say "Well this isn't about you." Do you not see how big of a condescending douche you come off in that? Not to mention when we are reaching the same conclusion...

See this is what you are missing about what I've been saying all morning. I also say those people can go fock themselves. You think they can because they were lying the whole time. I'm saying perhaps they weren't lying the whole time- perhaps they were seeing something we weren't, perhaps they were delusional- and instead are lying right now. In both of those scenarios (mine or yours) they are lying because it is advantageous to them to be lying at this point considering Biden is done as a political entity after January 20th,2025.

I mean I wasn't the one saying this in the thread....this all seems to be directly making it about me. Do you want to rethink some of these direct statements?

1.) Cool. It's been around for 6 years. 2.) Excuses for what? It is saying the media was reporting on Biden's mental acuity and offers many examples. 3.) Again cool. It also presents an example of MSNBC chyron trying to hide some stuff about Trump. It provides examples and mentions from, and links to, articles written by the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, NBC News, and NPR from September of 2022. It talks about a column from 2023 in the Times. It mentions writings from February of 2024 in the Post and Times. It talks about a piece written in 2023 about Biden in the Times and how it led to the Times being bashed so much a reporter at Politico stepped in with his own essay criticizing the pushback as false. I can seemingly rightly assume you didn't actually read the piece. Again, I did some research and showed examples of what I've seen. Now what you got?

Look I will try to be as clear about this as possible with the hopes you will stop obfuscating the point and ask for clarifications if you need more before immediately jumping to assuming my conclusion. Nowhere have I said Biden didn't have verbal gaffes. Nowhere did I say he was good in the debate with Trump. The only question I asked is- what were the people in the Democrat party seeing behind the scenes. Were they seeing someone privately that differed from what they were seeing publicly? Because even in some of Biden's "bad" press conferences- he was having solid moments. The Christian Science Monitor noted this in speaking about a press conference he did in July after the debate- you might remember the one from the scenarios mentioned: Now as I said earlier- if the Democrats behind the scenes were seeing a similar Biden- who was bad at times and good at times (sometimes in the same meetings) I can understand why they tried to hang on. It does not mean they were right for doing so, but I can understand the thinking as warped as it is. If Biden was completely unable to have good moments in public AND was like that behind the scenes as well then yes it is completely idiotic they hung on to him. And no I put very little value in what people here said because the most ardent MAGA people here make roughly 100 proclamations a week and hitting on 2 of them doesn't make them a prognosticator. It makes them a broken clock right twice a day. That puts us to where we are now with Democrats coming out against Biden. You seem to want to say (and correct me if I'm wrong)- "even though the Democrats are always wrong and we should never believe them, but I believe them now because it fits what I want them to be or say." I view it as "This is a bunch of idiots trying to divert away from the awful campaign they ran." I come to that conclusion because I always assume politicians and political parties are lying to me. Hidden in both of those conclusions is- Biden is no use to them anymore so they are okay pointing the finger.

This article also seems to throw a lot of stuff out there that flies in the face of your assertion that the MSM reporters were purposely not reporting it as "noted liberal papers" The New York Times and Washington Post mentioned it a lot: https://www.thebulwark.com/p/did-the-media-hide-bidens-aging

Well at least you are being honest now.

Where did I say that? Also, what articles do you have that show they purposely weren't reporting it? I've seen articles that talk about stuff related to it but I'm curious what more you have

You are trying to assign meaning to what I am saying without understanding what I wrote or even knowing ultimately what my position is. I have not jumped to any conclusions about what you are saying- I'd appreciate the same courtesy if you want to actually have a discussion.

That is a long way to avoid answering the question. I can rightly assume then that the answer is nothing. You have no knowledge you are privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors. Unless you want to change your answer?

You missed the question: So answer this simple question to start and we can move on from there: what knowledge are you privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors in private meetings?

To be clear- no one has blamed Trump for this. It seems like the texts came from an app called TextNow which the company spokesperson says was a "widespread, coordinated attack." Essentially you can go on the app with an e-mail address and text out to a bunch of people and the app makes it look like it is coming from a legitimate phone number. The company went through and deleted all the accounts. The FBI and DOJ are looking into everything and seeing if they can determine the source of the texts. The texts were sent primarily to "black and brown people" and reads:

Again- you are blissfully ignoring what I am saying because you want my opinion to be against yours so you can argue it. Additionally- you are taking the Democrats at the word now after months of saying we should not- the only thing that has changed is you got the result you wanted. That is a flawed decision-making paradigm. So answer this simple question to start and we can move on from there: what knowledge are you privy to about how Biden was behind closed doors in private meetings?

It can also be true in that they look up see the sky blue and then say "Well we were saying all along...." Gaslighting works in a few different ways. Here are the facts we know- we know how Biden looked in some interviews, we know how he looked in the debate on June 27th. Here is what we don't know- what was Biden like behind the scenes. What we know now following Tuesday's election is there is fingerpointing at Biden You take it to mean "The democrats finally came around to my way of thinking and should be castigated for how they are treating Biden I take it to mean: "They are doing everything they can to not blame themselves for running a shitty campaign and Biden is the scapegoat."

The other thing I'll add to the election this year is: If your opponents are running a campaign that is using criticizing DEI as a part of it- may not be the best idea to run a candidate that the perception of is that they were a DEI hire*. *(Again- I think that label greatly undercuts what Kamala has accomplished in her career but as I often argue here- perception always trumps reality for people)