Is The Political Future Of Elizabeth Warren Over?

[Watchmen]

Quote it. I didn't see it

#39

 

[Nous]

It was precisely "unscientific" because she had no scientific basis.

Then this statement that you have made here is likewise "unscientific".

How is what Warren did any more worthy of condemnation than what you have posted here?

 

[Nous]

Warren, and you, are horrible at math.

Prove it.

 

[Nous]

#39

#39:

It’s either a neglegent or intentional misrepresentation to get ahead (i.e., fraud).

Prove that she perpetrated fraud. You can only do so by showing that she made a false statement. Prove it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Then this statement that you have made here is likewise "unscientific".

How is what Warren did any more worthy of condemnation than what you have posted here?

You made the criticism of being "unscientific".
I simply showed you that her belief was the same.
This lawyerly tactic of trying to shift the fault to me won't work, Mr Hutz.
Are you actually trying to defend her claim that she's an Indian?

 

[Watchmen]

#39:

Prove that she perpetrated fraud. You can only do so by showing that she made a false statement. Prove it.

She identified herself as Native American. That was a misrepresentation. Whether it was intentional or negligent, I don’t know.

 

[Nous]

You made the criticism of being "unscientific".
I simply showed you that her belief was the same.

I said that there was nothing illegal, unethical or unscientific about her listing her race as Native American on the registration card. I say her statement was not unscientific because neither "race" nor "Native American" is a term defined by way of the scientific method.

You claim that her listing her designation of her race was unscientific due to a lack of scientific basis. I noted that your statement is likewise lacking, and I asked why her statement is more worthy of condemnation than hers. I ask again.

 

[Nous]

She identified herself as Native American. That was a misrepresentation.

Prove it.

 

[Revoltingest]

I said that there was nothing illegal, unethical or unscientific about her listing her race as Native American on the registration card. I say her statement was not unscientific because neither "race" nor "Native American" is a term defined by way of the scientific method.

You claim that her listing her designation of her race was unscientific due to a lack of scientific basis. I noted that your statement is likewise lacking, and I asked why her statement is more worthy of condemnation than hers. I ask again.

That's a very legalistic argument to avoid addressing what she did.
No one is suggesting that she be prosecuted....just scorned or mocked.

 

[Nous]

That's a very legalistic argument to avoid addressing what she did.
No one is suggesting that she be prosecuted....just scorned or mocked.

These are more statements from you that qualify as "unscientific" according to your claim about what qualifies as "unscientific". Therefore why is her statement more condemnationworthy than your statements?

 

[Revoltingest]

These are more statements from you that qualify as "unscientific" according to your claim about what qualifies as "unscientific". Therefore why is her statement more condemnationworthy than your statements?

By your rationale, Donald Trump could claim to be black.

 

[Nous]

By your rationale, Donald Trump could claim to be black.

I will continue asking: why is Warren's statement more condemnatory than your "unscientific" statements here?

 

[Revoltingest]

I will continue asking: why is Warren's statement more condemnatory than your "unscientific" statements here?

Your question misses the point which I covered earlier.
I recommend re-reading the exchange.

 

[Shad]

Prove it.

Already did with my math question.

 

[Revoltingest]

Prove it.

Ya know....you demand that a lot from others.
It just doesn't ring true as a reasonable rebuttal.

 

[Watchmen]

Prove it.

She’s admitted she was wrong. Not sure what you’re looking for.