Sure. First, image op makes a spurious claim about PSL use of funds, moving on without explaining where/why/how national elections is simply "a way for PSL to move money to the consultant class".
Then they admit their math is "far from perfect", but forge ahead anyway with the frankly ridiculous idea that the ratio of dollars to votes would somehow continue to hold true at scale.
I think the acknowledgement of poor math is merely to say "don't nitpick this" but pay attention to my final point.
How do you think about the point that electioneering for the national bourgeois American elections is a trap which sucks in resources and time that could be better spent elsewhere?
That both op and you are using leading language like "better spent elsewhere" and assuming the reader will follow along when this reader wonders who both of you think you are talking to? You are talking to a communist. Do you think we're just gonna sit and be told our money donated to help them win should be spent on something more "practical"?
Guess i should be exceptionally clear: you and they sound ridiculously, purposefully rude and paternal, clearly not understanding much or caring to learn either.
Why wouldn't we make fun of illogical logic delivered with naive confidence?
Says others are rude and paternal, structures sentences like:
"Guess I should be exceptionally clear"
Clearly you're the master of mature and respectful communication 🙄
Here's me being more direct. How is spending your disposable wages on getting 700 thousand votes in a national election doing anything productive for some greater cause or project? Because you say you're not gonna be lectured about it but you ain't exactly said anything in response to the question. What use might be found in 700k in a major union organization drive? Or using 700 dollars a piece to get a 1000 homeless people set up with more permanent shelter? These basic examples seem like a much better way of building meaningful support for a cause than the spectical of the election.
Unless you have a solid answer for that I will continue my "naive paternalistic" questioning of the methods of the party I put my dumb vote in for.
Teach you how you're wrong? You didn't say anything of substance, just being hyper critical and aggro of benign statements and making a false claim which someone already corrected you about. You pulled a "do you even know who you're talking to" to anonymous strangers on the internet because they asked basic questions about why wasting millions on electoral campaigns that have failed to produce any value for over three decades is a revolutionary strategy. Instead of having any response to a valid question you just got angry that someone asked it.
Which consultants took PSL money? Can you name the firms or people that were paid? Or are you referring to printing costs or costs of running online ads?
Sure. First, image op makes a spurious claim about PSL use of funds, moving on without explaining where/why/how national elections is simply "a way for PSL to move money to the consultant class".
Then they admit their math is "far from perfect", but forge ahead anyway with the frankly ridiculous idea that the ratio of dollars to votes would somehow continue to hold true at scale.
I think the acknowledgement of poor math is merely to say "don't nitpick this" but pay attention to my final point.
How do you think about the point that electioneering for the national bourgeois American elections is a trap which sucks in resources and time that could be better spent elsewhere?
That both op and you are using leading language like "better spent elsewhere" and assuming the reader will follow along when this reader wonders who both of you think you are talking to? You are talking to a communist. Do you think we're just gonna sit and be told our money donated to help them win should be spent on something more "practical"?
Guess i should be exceptionally clear: you and they sound ridiculously, purposefully rude and paternal, clearly not understanding much or caring to learn either.
Why wouldn't we make fun of illogical logic delivered with naive confidence?
Clearer?
"exceptionally rude and paternal"
Says others are rude and paternal, structures sentences like:
"Guess I should be exceptionally clear"
Clearly you're the master of mature and respectful communication 🙄
Here's me being more direct. How is spending your disposable wages on getting 700 thousand votes in a national election doing anything productive for some greater cause or project? Because you say you're not gonna be lectured about it but you ain't exactly said anything in response to the question. What use might be found in 700k in a major union organization drive? Or using 700 dollars a piece to get a 1000 homeless people set up with more permanent shelter? These basic examples seem like a much better way of building meaningful support for a cause than the spectical of the election.
Unless you have a solid answer for that I will continue my "naive paternalistic" questioning of the methods of the party I put my dumb vote in for.
Weeeeeellllllll......
what would you say if i.... Came in hot, fucked up and didn't notice you weren't jabril, and made an ass of myself?
Imagine my surprise when i got a reply from someone i thought i blocked.. hehe... Heeh.... and so picked up a paternal tone and fuck me, i am sorry.
I'll give you a more proper answer to your question but after i take some time to get this egg offa my face
Ahhh...
No sweat then.
Lmao go back to reddit
Edit: because you're doing the um actually posting being criticized by OP but way harder and more cringe
Aw, don't be that way, teach me how I'm wrong. If i misread you I'm prepared to both apologize and to be educated.
After your edit Edit: shoooo "go back to reddit" and soundin like youre still there.
Teach you how you're wrong? You didn't say anything of substance, just being hyper critical and aggro of benign statements and making a false claim which someone already corrected you about. You pulled a "do you even know who you're talking to" to anonymous strangers on the internet because they asked basic questions about why wasting millions on electoral campaigns that have failed to produce any value for over three decades is a revolutionary strategy. Instead of having any response to a valid question you just got angry that someone asked it.
The post does not say that. The post is talking about USAmerican elections in general being a way to move money to a consultant class.
Which consultants took PSL money? Can you name the firms or people that were paid? Or are you referring to printing costs or costs of running online ads?
Ask the person who the OP is about. I was merely correcting a misunderstanding.
Thank you for that clarification, you're right