McConnell gets one right
-
But one could have asked an AI to write that. As one probably did. And that one was probably not even Mitch. It was probably one of his handlers.
As to the substance, sure, let's explore this alliance that has historical relevance beyond that of NATO. Sounds good.
-
But one could have asked an AI to write that. As one probably did. And that one was probably not even Mitch. It was probably one of his handlers.
As to the substance, sure, let's explore this alliance that has historical relevance beyond that of NATO. Sounds good.
@Horace said in McConnell gets one right:
But one could have asked an AI to write that. As one probably did.
It makes a lot more sense than the natural stupidity typically posted by his boss and his minions.
sure, let's explore this alliance that has historical relevance beyond that of NATO.
Again, highly preferable to undermining it at every turn with 'stable genius', a polite word for horse-shit.
-
But one could have asked an AI to write that. As one probably did. And that one was probably not even Mitch. It was probably one of his handlers.
As to the substance, sure, let's explore this alliance that has historical relevance beyond that of NATO. Sounds good.
@Horace said in McConnell gets one right:
But one could have asked an AI to write that. As one probably did. And that one was probably not even Mitch. It was probably one of his handlers.
So? I donβt anticipate him disputing its substance anytime soon.
As to the substance, sure, let's explore this alliance that has historical relevance beyond that of NATO. Sounds good.
Pointless if the people who should be learning refuse to listen.
