Nov 4 · 1 min read
A few things here:
- Having a “Facedbook” and believing that politicians should not be able to use blatant lies in ads are not mutually exclusive. You know that.
- If you could point to the part of the piece in which I argued that Facebook should police comments, that would really bolster your argument. Of course, I didn’t say that, so don’t waste your time.
- I used to be sympathetic to Buttigieg, even going as far to rank him as my top three. But as I demonstrate in the article, he has dramatically reversed himself on issue that are important to me, and therefore I prefer other candidates over him.
- I hardly think that my empirically-based piece is tantamount to “totally trash[ing]” the man, but hey, go off.
- If think if you read more of my articles you’ll find that I dabble more in the “shades of grey” than you give me credit for here. Seriously — I admit that I’m a social democrat (slightly to the right of the Sanders camp), but that does not mean I lack nuance. For example, I don’t like Warren’s proposed trade plan even though I support her candidacy. I think Sanders is wrong on a lot of issues. Nevertheless, I do value consistency — something that Pete, charismatic as he may be, lacks.
Thanks for the read! I’d recommend, though, that you engage with arguments I actually made rather than random bullshit you assumed about me.
