Quote:
|
asking them to restate the crux of their argument is also useful. often they can't, because they are trying to distract from core issues with technicalities which may or may not be relevant.
|
That's a rather astute post, or rather the attempt was. If you actually read my post a little clearer, you'd know that I wasn't debating who had the majority, but refuting Market's assertions based on facts. Yes, through a technical standpoint, it was 50-49, but he could have looked at that himself. So you see, there was no "misdirection", as you'd like to believe. I'm not even sure what the point of your post was, other than to try and point out faults that aren't there.
Quote:
|
in this case the really relevant factor is how the votes turned out, not the party distrubution, which was 50/50 +/-1 during those two years.
|
The assertions was:
Quote:
|
they allowed terrorists to fly planes into the wtc and they invaded two countries
|
Seeing as how they weren't the majority by any means, whether technical or not, this point was proven to be false. That was all the point was meant to do. No distraction from some imaginary argument, nothing. Pay more attention next time.