Hasan Piker

#76
#76
I don't particularly mind Piker, largely because I believe that anyone who is lavishly compensated to discuss politics independently (i.e. not via a traditional network) is a grifter irrespective of affiliation and all grifters are two sides of the same coin, but pretending that he hasn't been linked to major progressive Dems for years (what about his Among Us games with AOC during COVID-19's infancy?) is nuts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and Rickyvol77
#79
#79
Persian Vol said:
“Guilt by association is a logical fallacy where a person is deemed guilty or negative based solely on their connection to a disfavored group or individual. It is a form of ad hominem attack that wrongly transfers negative attributes from one entity to another”
Click to expand...

This is politics. Not criminal court. In politics who you associate 100% matters. Have you missed the entire Epstein thread?
 
#81
#81
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and InVOLuntary
#88
#88
Vol8188 said:
Good job! You’re starting to get this. I’m proud.

In politics who you associate with matters and when someone comes out as purely evil (such as Epstein or Piker) a politician should disassociate from them. Trump claims to have done so decades ago.

What is Mamdani waiting on?
Click to expand...

Epstein and Piker aren’t even on the same hemisphere of controversial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#90
#90
Persian Vol said:
Epstein and Piker aren’t even on the same hemisphere of controversial.
Click to expand...

At what level of controversy should politicians disassociate? Earlier you seemed to imply no such level exists, otherwise it’s “guilt by association”.

Piker has stated we need to spill capitalist blood in the streets, democrats should gut their opponents on stage, openly supports Hamas, states people should steal from corporations, and defends the murder of the UHC ceo.

To me, that crosses the line for when a politician should disassociate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, InVOLuntary and Rickyvol77
#94
#94
Vol8188 said:
At what level of controversy should politicians disassociate? Earlier you seemed to imply no such level exists, otherwise it’s “guilt by association”.

Piker has stated we need to spill capitalist blood in the streets, democrats should gut their opponents on stage, openly supports Hamas, states people should steal from corporations, and defends the murder of the UHC ceo.

To me, that crosses the line for when a politician should disassociate.
Click to expand...

I never implied such, but you love putting arguments in others mouth so you can come off as making a point.

Im not going to waste time comparing a vulgar millennial streamer to Jeffrey ****ing Epstein.
 
  • Like
Reactions: n_huffhines, NashVol11 and Smokey123
#95
#95
Persian Vol said:
“Guilt by association is a logical fallacy where a person is deemed guilty or negative based solely on their connection to a disfavored group or individual. It is a form of ad hominem attack that wrongly transfers negative attributes from one entity to another”
Click to expand...

Weird to go from this ignorant post, to then agreeing with me that politicians should disassociate from problematic individuals.

Now the ultimate question is do you see Piker as someone who democrats should disassociate from?

Or is it just an “ad hominem attack” and “guilt by association” to expect them to do so?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#96
#96
Persian Vol said:
I never implied such, but you love putting arguments in others mouth so you can come off as making a point.
Click to expand...

You 100% implied that. We provided you horrific things this man stated and then you just claimed it was “ad hominem attacks” and “guilt by association”.

But now you’re agreeing with us that politicians should disassociate from some people?

The ultimate question though, you’ve still ignored. Should politicians disassociate from Piker? Why are you incapable of answering this?
Persian Vol said:
Im not going to waste time comparing a vulgar millennial streamer to Jeffrey ****ing Epstein.
Click to expand...

You started the comparison. So idk why you would choose to waste your own time.
 
#99
#99
Vol8188 said:
Weird to go from this ignorant post, to then agreeing with me that politicians should disassociate from problematic individuals.

Now the ultimate question is do you see Piker as someone who democrats should disassociate from?

Or is it just an “ad hominem attack” and “guilt by association” to expect them to do so?
Click to expand...

You really do like to have conversations with yourself when you argue with other people.

Also, “ignorant” lol. I posted the definition of the term you clearly weren’t aware of.
 
#100
#100
Persian Vol said:
You really do like to have conversations with yourself when you argue with other people.

Also, “ignorant” lol. I posted the definition of the term you clearly weren’t aware of.
Click to expand...

The ignorant part is your lack of understanding that who a politician associates does and should matter.

I’ll ask again…..is Piker someone democrats should disassociate from?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top