• Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    As much as we’d like to think that there is dynamic change with each new president, there really isn’t that much other than the surface diplomacy.

    So both sides do it.

    And therefore Clinton being friends with him is NBD.

    If this isn’t using “both sides” as a defense, it sure looks like it.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Again, reinterpreting what I said in a limited context to hyperbole.

      No, both sides are not the same.

      Clinton being friends with him is indicative of what her foreign policy was/would have been.

      Exercise some nuance, man.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I see how it is.

        “Both sides” is like “vote blue no matter who” in that it’s only meant to be used to dismiss criticism from the left.

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldBanned from community
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You mean to tell me that you’ve never seen someone say “both sides” when someone to their left criticizes Democrats?

            Why is there no insistence upon nuance then?