upto60percentoff

But for there to be somebody to downwardly punch, then it must be true.

Removed by mod

I’m trying to figure out if you’ve convinced yourself of this or if you’re just trying to avoid appearing wrong on the internet. Utterly fascinating.

For reference, demand would very obviously be a synonym of ask in this case.

If you pointedly and repeatedly demand which alternate candidate somebody canvassed for, then one of three things is true:

• You don’t think an alternate candidate exists
• You think somebody needs to canvas to hold an opinion
• You think there is an alternate candidate, but are just being difficult for the sake of it

Why bother pretending otherwise?

The point being that you went from not believing anybody else could do the job to believing in Harris because it turns out that if somebody isn’t campaigning then they don’t seem a viable candidate?

You’re really doubling down at every opportunity?

How is expecting people to canvas before having an opinion more justifiable than expecting them to donate before having one?

Ignoring that asking about canvassing isn’t all you did, expecting people to canvas to have an opinion on politics is so nonsensical it actually brings us full circle to the deliberately ridiculous original comment I left.

How is expecting people to canvas before having an opinion any better than expecting people to donate? It reeks of elitism.

Pointedly asking people who their preferred candidate is to Biden doesn’t fit that narrative, though.

I think both are incredibly weird but you do you, boo

I take it this means you’ve reconsidered your previous opinion that Biden is the only viable candidate for the democrats

Okay so the emoji thing. Not allowed to criticise anything? What a strange and unique lens to view the world through.

“Voter apathy helps Trump” has a lot of baked in context that makes it kind-of-true when “You not voting helps Trump” just objectively isn’t.

I must say though, I wasn’t miserable when i made that comment, and now that you have received the initial thing you were looking for (or confirmation that you had it all along), I expect to see nothing but positivity from you for the next week.

But I’m not miserable about Harris? I just told you that.

Or are you trying to say that making any comments that don’t end with a string of 🎉 emojis is off the table for the next 3 to 5 working days ?

I get that maybe you misinterpreted my comment as anti-harris, since I didn’t bother to make my specific stance clear and kind of threw it out there, but I’ve now clarified.

Why are you doubling down now? Just to try and retroactively justify some unnecessary receipt pulling?

🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉

I’d honestly be interested to see a cohorent argument as to why the first two aren’t true if not voting is. I can’t think of one.

The last one I threw in there for fun.

And I support Harris?

“Not voting is voting for the other side” is completely ineffectual as a slogan, since the type of person likely to not vote is going to immediately file it away in their brain as the obvious hyperbole-bordering-on-lie it is.

What’s your point?

but not voting […] means actively Supporting fascism

• Not donating means actively funding fascism
• Not canvassing means actively canvassing for fascism
• Not committing acts of terror in support of democrats means actively committing acts of terror in support of republicans

Even if he had, you still wouldn’t know if he had.

I imagine somebody well connected enough to be an envoy doesn’t share in the living conditions of the average citizen

I’m not saying they’ll do it, I’m saying it’s incorrect to state that there’s no valid strategic target when there absolutely is.

Ukraine?

Striking inside their territory won’t matter all that much if they can just nuke Kiyv.

And breaking the nuclear taboo is a catastrophe for everybody, regardless of who the target is.

If Ericsson was a person they’d struggle to dress themselves

All the probing is just backpay that’s accumulated a lot of interest.