What makes you think I am obliged to refute a subjective thesis? Especially in this medium? Maddow is just another mediocre person dumb people think of as a smart person.
If you cannot even back up your own claim and admit it's entirely "subjective", then you're confirming my point: you're here to vent, not to have a rational, real debate (defined as: a conversation that allows us all to get closer to reality by studying objective, proven evidence and facts).
Democracy cannot survive without real debates among citizens who disagree. So feel free to use a Substack as nerdy as Krugman's to merely whine, but in that case, your attitude is definitely part of the problem, not the solution.
I was referring to your estimation of Maddow as the subjective thesis. Hang out in your neighborhood bar if you can't take your sacred cow getting gored. Stop being starstruck by poseurs on the telebision.
The thread speaks for itself, contradict me all you like. That's a yes.
Uh... how to contradict a post with no concrete arguments in the first place... ? Any idea?
What makes you think I am obliged to refute a subjective thesis? Especially in this medium? Maddow is just another mediocre person dumb people think of as a smart person.
If you cannot even back up your own claim and admit it's entirely "subjective", then you're confirming my point: you're here to vent, not to have a rational, real debate (defined as: a conversation that allows us all to get closer to reality by studying objective, proven evidence and facts).
Democracy cannot survive without real debates among citizens who disagree. So feel free to use a Substack as nerdy as Krugman's to merely whine, but in that case, your attitude is definitely part of the problem, not the solution.
I was referring to your estimation of Maddow as the subjective thesis. Hang out in your neighborhood bar if you can't take your sacred cow getting gored. Stop being starstruck by poseurs on the telebision.
Still no arguments whatsoever, I see ;-)
HaHaHa! You're hilarious.