• Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Oh my God, how did you not already find one of the hundreds of other articles that gave that same validation in the last 10 years? If you were waiting for this moment for that, that’s pretty much on you.

    • Kobibi@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      This is an interview with Sanders’ chief campaign strategist about his new book dissecting the 2016 primary. If you don’t care about it then fine, whatever. But you’re clearly commenting on what you imagine the article is, not what it actually is

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        So the thesis statement is not driven by actual political analysis but is from a biased source about the only event that would make him relevant in a discussion of politics? Man, if only the title or post text had told me that I would have not-clicked twice as hard.

        Next up on my not-reading list, Harris’s campaign strategists talking about how their strategy was actual great and people should listen to them about politics. And that’s a group actually involved in a recent election. Bernie had a whole second campaign with a different strategist since the one with that guy. And during that campaign this guy wasn’t involved and had to throw in with Andrew Yang instead.

        • Kobibi@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I do not care about your opinion on an article you haven’t read

          My point here has never been defending the article. It’s that you shouldn’t make wrong assumptions based on headlines and comment based on those. It’s bad form

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            The very existence and sharing of this article is a waste of time. The context that it’s from the last person in the world who would give such a thesis value and in promotion of a book just makes it worse not better. My assumptions were kinder than they would have been otherwise.

            Your comment saying who the author is is literally the only comment in this entire post that references the content of this specific article. Every single other comment is a generic commentary on politics, rehashed arguments about Sanders’ primary run, or meta comments. Which is more evidence of its worthlessness. So I don’t care that you don’t care and you can tut tut about correct form to someone who has a reason to seek your approval.