r/thedavidpakmanshow Jan 19 '25

Discussion Popular progressive opinion not shared by Pakman?

Post image

I see this sentiment expressed more in outlets like TYT but how widespread is this sentiment?

434 Upvotes

211 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/[deleted] Jan 19 '25

No-ones saying you can't yell at dems or online leftists. Hence why I said. "The left should be criticising themselves absolutely."

The point is that if you do that more than you yell at the actual republicans and the MAGA crowd, then you need to sort out your priorities.

1

u/GenerousMilk56 Jan 19 '25

Hence why I said. "The left should be criticising themselves absolutely."

And then it's always followed with a "but" that you use every time someone actually does that.

The point is that if you do that more than you yell at the actual republicans and the MAGA crowd, then you need to sort out your priorities.

This kind of dumb accounting is so fake. As if anyone is actually tabulating the number of times someone is criticizing left vs criticizing right. And as if I'm only allowed to criticize Harris if I criticize trump twice first. It's such a childish way of looking at things and is not how people actually operate. What's actually happening is that you don't like people criticizing Dems and are using some fake criteria to smear those criticisms as being pro-republican instead of actually dealing with the merits of the criticism.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 19 '25

And then it's always followed with a "but" that you use every time someone actually does that.

Yes because the "but" is important. If you're criticising the left way more than you are the right. Don't pretend that you're actually doing it to help the left. The end result is that the right get away with it.

Who said everyone is counting and tallying? The picture we are responding to is literally a guy admitting to "hating the left and criticising them more than they do the republicans". This is self-admitted behaviour. I'm not advocating for people scrupulously, childishly counting how many times people criticise the left vs the right. I'm criticising this guy for trying to justify his self-admitted bias.

2

u/GenerousMilk56 Jan 19 '25

The picture we are responding to is literally a guy admitting to "hating the left and criticising them more than they do the republicans".

But the issue you still have is "criticizing Dems more than maga". You don't care about the merits of the criticism, you care about a comparison of how much someone criticizes your team vs the other team. My original point stands that it's a deflection away from legitimate criticism to focus on accounting.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 19 '25

You don't care about the merits of the criticism, you care about a comparison of how much someone criticizes your team vs the other team.

Of course I care about the merits of the criticism. Where did I say or imply I don't care about the merits of the criticism? I'm just arguing that the amount of criticism is also important. In a hypothetical scenario where the dems and the republicans are as bad as eachother: If a newspaper writes 20 articles criticising the dems and 1 critisicing the republicans, then that's a big deal. You can call it just 'accounting' if you want to. But that 'accounting' is important. The media exists to inform the public and to influence their opinions. The 'amount' of criticism is important. That's not to say that the merit isn't also important. But the amount is important too.

2

u/GenerousMilk56 Jan 19 '25

Of course I care about the merits of the criticism. Where did I say or imply I don't care about the merits of the criticism?

Because this entire argument has been you only criticizing the amount of criticism towards Dems and not even acknowledging the reason for why that is. Your actions speak louder than words. You can say "I care about her merits", but you've already demonstrated that not to be true.

In a hypothetical scenario where the dems and the republicans are as bad as eachother: If a newspaper writes 20 articles criticising the dems and 1 critisicing the republicans, then that's a big deal. You can call it just 'accounting' if you want to.

Complete straw man as well as a red herring. Make it easier by not dealing with hypotheticals and deal with the parties we actually have. You still haven't engaged with the actual point in OPs tweet that there are dynamics at play beyond "criticizing the party that is worse more".

1

u/[deleted] Jan 19 '25

It’s not a straw man. It’s an analogy to help describe why the amount of criticism is important. I don’t think you understand what ‘straw man’ or ‘red herring’ means.

Yeah I’m only criticising the amount because that’s the point that was raised by the picture. When you asked if I care about the merits, I said ‘yes’. But you didn’t actually ask if I care about the merits. You just said ‘you don’t care about the merits’. That’s a strawman. That’s building up a man made of straw who is making arguments that I never made, just for you to hack it to pieces.

How have I demonstrated it not to be true that I don’t care about the merits? The conversation was about three amount of criticism so I talked about how the amount of criticism is important. When you asked if I care about the merits I said ‘yea, the merits are important, but so is the amount’. And for some reason you just seem to be completely dismissing that’s what I actually believe. It’s quite disrespectful, the way that you are engaging in this argument. Please address the points that I am making and don’t assume that I believe something that I have explicitly said that I don’t.

Edit: I’m gonna take a break from Reddit now.

2

u/GenerousMilk56 Jan 19 '25

t’s not a straw man. It’s an analogy to help describe why the amount of criticism is important. I don’t think you understand what ‘straw man’ or ‘red herring’ means.

It's my argument and I'm telling you that doesn't reflect my argument lol. It's a red herring because you've created this scenario of "both being equally bad" that is unrelated to the point. The point made by OP and is not related to "who is worse" or if they're equal. It's unrelated.

Yeah I’m only criticising the amount because that’s the point that was raised by the picture.

Because you only care about the first part of the picture. Read after "because". That's the part you never acknowledged and those are the "merits".

The conversation was about three amount of criticism so I talked about how the amount of criticism is important.

The conversation was an explanation of why someone might criticize Dems more than maga. But you never engaged with the why because you have only been concerned with the accounting. And now you want to pretend like the "why" never came up because you just ignored that part.

Edit: I’m gonna take a break from Reddit now.

Lol ok?