• nomous@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s called a strawman to build an argument that was never made and then attack it.

    • Cleggory@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      You didn’t make this absurd claim?:

      If something affects both sides it’s effectively “a wash” and cancel each other out.

      If you are victimized, you believe you then have the right to also victimize “to cancel it out”?

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Context is important, that’s how we continue the conversation.

        If Candidate A is a genocidal maniac, and Candidate B is a genocidal maniac. It’s effectively a wash and pointless to say “well Candidate A supports genocide!”

        Hope this clarified my meaning.

        • Cleggory@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Criticizing genocide is pointless if both major candidates support it.

          Apathy has paved a basis for genocide throughout history, your view is not novel nor beneficial.

    • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      an argument that was never made

      It says 0 scandals right there in the post

      Just because the other guy also has scandals doesn’t mean she has 0