Feelings .....

Nothing more than feelings .....

You try to paint those observations off as emotions, you use feelings here as a pejorative. It is more like instincts, those things that keep you alive.

Nevermind, ignore feelings, they don't mean anything. Go pet that giant cuddly grizzly.

Trump has used countless insults against people he didn't like. Glad to see you recognize his failure and lizard brain.

Plus, it's not like attacking Haley because her adult daughter uses tik tok is some genius or inciteful argument against Haley. It is a spurious argument, does he expect that Haley dictates the social media actions of her adult daughter?

Trump's insults are funny and score home runs because it's the truth. Haley is just another boring tedious DC parasite sponging off the military industrial complex. There's nothing original or interesting about her, not even her insults.

Dunking on her daughter was a fair point and necessary. She's an adult after all, and whenever she's in proximity to her mom she's putting the country in danger by having Chinese spy software installed on her phone.

You try to paint those observations off as emotions, you use feelings here as a pejorative. It is more like instincts, those things that keep you alive.

Nevermind, ignore feelings, they don't mean anything. Go pet that giant cuddly grizzly.

Spidey Senses!!

Spidey Senses!!

Funny to see someone who constantly ignores common sense -- calling it "being objective" -- post that feelings (aka instincts) are a valid basis for making decisions.

Screw the evidence.  My gut tells me the opposite is true!!

Anti-gun activists know in their gut the world would be a better place if only police and the military were permitted to use guns -- even though historical evidence proves otherwise.

I guess trusting one's instincts only counts when certain people agree with the conclusion.

...
But you are assuming the IRS is lying or otherwise doing something otherwise in abuse of their power. Your bias is showing, you are not representing an objective look at this thing.

You can say that you suspect the IRS and ATF might be doing something wrong but that's not what you are doing. Look at the way you say "No evidence there was any tax issue" when you know full well that you don't know this to be a fact. Unless you have some inside source you don't want to mention you have no knowledge of what type of evidence does or does not exist.

History is evidence.  Paterns of behavior are evidence.  Conclusions based on past trends of behavior are not using "instinct", but rather common sense logic.  To argue that we need vetted evidence is not only contrary to the "instinct' post, but also ignores the evidence -- albeit indirect and historical - shows an objective viewpoint.

Did Dahmer eat parts of the body found in his closet?  Having eaten others in the past, and the location of the body are circumstantial and historical evidence, any reasonable person can deduce the most likely truth from that.

You try to paint those observations off as emotions, you use feelings here as a pejorative. It is more like instincts, those things that keep you alive.

Nevermind, ignore feelings, they don't mean anything. Go pet that giant cuddly grizzly.

so dumb

Trump's insults are funny and score home runs because it's the truth. Haley is just another boring tedious DC parasite sponging off the military industrial complex. There's nothing original or interesting about her, not even her insults.

Dunking on her daughter was a fair point and necessary. She's an adult after all, and whenever she's in proximity to her mom she's putting the country in danger by having Chinese spy software installed on her phone.

Pencil Neck
Low Energy Jeb
Crazy Nancy
Crazy Hillary
Little Marco
Sleepy Eyes
etc. etc. etc.
Boot-Edge-Edge[ (OK that one was funny)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump

We aren't exactly dealing with a rocket scientist here.

I don't know much about Haley beyond what I have seen of the debates so there may very well be deserved criticism of her, I don't defend her from any of that but that doesn't make Vivek's performance any better.

You framed an actual coherent argument about the problem of her daughter using Tik Tok, one that makes sense from a security standpoint but Vivek didn't. He only said she couldn't control her own family, that is not a good argument, that is my criticism of him. I prefer candidates who can make better arguments, like yours.

I guess trusting one's instincts only counts when certain people agree with the conclusion.

History is evidence.  Paterns of behavior are evidence.  Conclusions based on past trends of behavior are not using "instinct", but rather common sense logic.  To argue that we need vetted evidence is not only contrary to the "instinct' post, but also ignores the evidence -- albeit indirect and historical - shows an objective viewpoint.

Did Dahmer eat parts of the body found in his closet?  Having eaten others in the past, and the location of the body are circumstantial and historical evidence, any reasonable person can deduce the most likely truth from that.

CMO talked about vibes and gut feelings. These are things that are not always quantifiable. They are often difficult to impossible to put into words but our brain performs these assessments to keep us safe. For example you can often read hostile body language on a person but unless you are trained to articulate it, most can't really explain it, they just would say the person seemed hostile. You experience all these "feelings" too if you are a normal human. You just only complain about feelings when it is against something you like.

They aren't always perfect but we don't always have time to scientifically measure things either. To CMO, Vivek gives off bad vibes, they activate his gut feelings. Is that a foolproof argument against Vivek? No, but Vivek isn't on trial either CMO doesn't need to prove his distrust for Vivek.