Hillary lost because of Russian election interference. She won the popular vote.

Russian bot farms spammed the internet with their talking points in strategic areas to influence the electoral vote.

That is why it is important to check the history of accounts who post to see if they are pushing specific talking points.

Right I get that, but the alternative is no help from the US. Which is less beneficial to Europe/NATO than some help until/if Republicans block additional help.

It’s called diplomacy and it is a requirement of getting anything done in a split Congress.

How is it a liability? Russia is a threat to Euro-NATO nations. It is in your/their best interests to have the US help against Russia even if US Republicans try to prevent it.

2/3rds of Americans don’t know what AI is or the limitations of LLMs.

You’re ignoring the optics of not negotiating. This is politics. How you present yourself impacts voters’ opinions.

No one is gaslighting or making strawman arguments or any other psych buzzwords over here.

You have a good one too. I’m glad the internet allows us to have these conversations because I think it is important to have discorse with people of opposing views.

The idea is to negotiate in good faith to show that is our stance and not give in to bad faith negotiations.

If we don’t negotiate at all then there’s no way forward.

The GOP as a party supports fascism yes. But individual members of Congress are on a spectrum and can be influenced to vote in our best interests.

That’s why there are almost always some members that aren’t voting along their party lines. It’s happened like this since the inception of our government.

That’s why diplomacy is important.

Just look at how democrats won concessions from the house on the spending bill recently and made republicans look stupid in the process.

That happened because of diplomacy. Your approach would’ve resulted in a government shutdown instead.

So again, you’re saying he shouldn’t negotiate with republicans which will result in nothing getting done.

How is what I said a strawman?

If politicians don’t negotiate across the aisle when majorities in Congress are slim then nothing will get done.

Did you or did you not imply that Fetterman shouldn’t negotiate?

How is that a strawman?

So regardless of the subject you want our government in gridlock and our politicians to not get anything done. Got it.

So you don’t think our politicians should ever be diplomatic or just when on the subject of immigration reform?

What you think I’m saying: ‘he didn’t say “I’m not a progressive”’

What BruceTwarzan said: “Why would you ever say that you don’t like progress?”

I said: “he didn’t say that” (he didn’t say “I don’t like progress”)

You can’t just throw a temper tantrum and expect to get your way. Diplomacy is required to actually get things done.

Then you didn’t read the article because he never said “I don’t like progress”

He didn’t say that. He said he is willing to have a discussion about immigration policy with republicans.

Whoever wrote the article is trying to speak on behalf of an entire political group called “Progressives” by claiming everyone in the group came to a unanimous decision to not discuss immigration (this isn’t true).

So the writer of the article is claiming Fetterman isn’t a part of the group of Progressives because Fetterman is willing to do his job by being diplomatic.

What if he is doing good things like donating to charities and investing in low income communities and Republicans try to spin it as a bad thing to claim Democrats are as bad as the Republican Party?

What should we do then?

Because that is what is happening.

Congress can’t be trusted anymore than Trump when it comes to national security secrets.

some things are buried beneath mountains of different security designations

You say this but then claim it’s embezzlement.

It’s much more likely that the Pentagon keeps this info guarded so it doesn’t end up in a bathroom in Mar-a-Lago.