• blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Have you considered why you have to use so many adjectives? Because she didnt at all run on a progressive platform. And you are claiming Obama won for not running on any progressiveness. He extensively ran on climate change and healthcare reform. Youve stretched your characterizations so far to try to fit your theory that you put Hillary to the left of Obama. Maybe its your theory that needs changing instead.

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      6 months ago

      I use those adjectives because you want to change it to “she’s not [far] left”. And I’m clarifying what her position was. It was just a tiny bit left.

      The number of adjectives is because people like to skip over it l, so I add more to get people to notice. And you’re still at it! That’s twice that you try to force words into my mouth. So ciao.

        • someguy3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          6 months ago

          Ok take out the far.

          You’re saying she’s not left. And: I didn’t say she’s left, I said she ran a teeny weeny itsy little bit left with the map room to fight climate change. And you wonder why I have the adjectives lol.

          • blazera@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            I promise you I see the words. The problem is that Obama won his elections, so you can only downplay her progressiveness so far. I wouldnt characterize his campaigns as being itsy bitsy teeny weeny left. You mentioned him campaigning on the word Hope, but he also famously campaigned on “Change we can believe in”.