I’m just curious if you’re getting involved in grassroots activism, promoting candidates you agree with, canvassing the neighborhood to try to drum up support, etc. …
It’s completely disienguous to put the entire onus of finding a candidate you agree with on other people.
Talk about being disingenuous. not to mention holier than thou.
Sorry I’m currently busy running a network protecting my local community from the jackboots.
What part of this statement makes you think I havent/dont do all the above. I’m mad that you chuckle fucks keep riding the vote harder while continuing to give your support to candidates neither of us, allegedly, want instead of letting those candidates just lose because they literally suck.
I’m mad that you chuckle fucks keep riding the vote harder while continuing to give your support to candidates neither of us, allegedly, want instead of letting those candidates just lose because they literally suck.
What would that accomplish? Sincerely, no one has been able to explain to me how the slightly-less-bad candidate losing provides any benefit whatsoever.
It’s not like the other mainstream candidate doesn’t also suck, and moreso in fact.
It’s not like if enough people sit out the election it triggers some secret clause written into the Constitution in invisible magic ink. One of the candidates that suck still wins.
I’m genuinely curious, what is supposed to happen if we let them lose? Who does that help besides the slightly shittier candidate?
I’ve read through like this entire comment section, and most of your comments specifically, and I haven’t seen it. Care to link or quote the comment where you answer this question? I can’t find it
I’m done hand feeding people, you want my help for comprehension demonstrate some critical thinking on your end. feel free to respond to this with a analysis of what happens in various situations when voting for candidates and add where you’re confused and I’ll address your questions. otherwise shrug its a you problem and I’m done playing games with people who just mouth breath talking points and their personal fears at me.
Welcome back to school I guess, remember show your work.
What? You can’t be done doing something you never started doing. You keep saying that your strategy will work, but haven’t said how, or given an example of it working, or really provide any kind of evidence or reasoning except repeatedly insisting.
It really seems like you’re the confused one here, mouthing talking points and your personal fears. I already told you my question and you’re just deflecting and trying to shift the burden onto me, which makes zero sense since you’re making a frankly wild and counter-intuitive claim. Based on the ratios, it seems like most people are in the same boat as me in having no idea how what you’re proposing is actually supposed to work.
I’m not really interested in a schoolteacher role-play with someone so insistent that they’re right and everyone else is wrong with zero evidence or justification, especially when you go on to denigrate and belittle people for asking you to show your work.
Talk about being disingenuous. not to mention holier than thou.
What part of this statement makes you think I havent/dont do all the above. I’m mad that you chuckle fucks keep riding the vote harder while continuing to give your support to candidates neither of us, allegedly, want instead of letting those candidates just lose because they literally suck.
What would that accomplish? Sincerely, no one has been able to explain to me how the slightly-less-bad candidate losing provides any benefit whatsoever.
It’s not like the other mainstream candidate doesn’t also suck, and moreso in fact.
It’s not like if enough people sit out the election it triggers some secret clause written into the Constitution in invisible magic ink. One of the candidates that suck still wins.
I’m genuinely curious, what is supposed to happen if we let them lose? Who does that help besides the slightly shittier candidate?
sounds like a you problem. I’ve addressed this literal question repeatedly.
I’ve read through like this entire comment section, and most of your comments specifically, and I haven’t seen it. Care to link or quote the comment where you answer this question? I can’t find it
suddenly when asked to show your work you stop responding huh? thought so.
I’m done hand feeding people, you want my help for comprehension demonstrate some critical thinking on your end. feel free to respond to this with a analysis of what happens in various situations when voting for candidates and add where you’re confused and I’ll address your questions. otherwise shrug its a you problem and I’m done playing games with people who just mouth breath talking points and their personal fears at me.
Welcome back to school I guess, remember show your work.
What? You can’t be done doing something you never started doing. You keep saying that your strategy will work, but haven’t said how, or given an example of it working, or really provide any kind of evidence or reasoning except repeatedly insisting.
It really seems like you’re the confused one here, mouthing talking points and your personal fears. I already told you my question and you’re just deflecting and trying to shift the burden onto me, which makes zero sense since you’re making a frankly wild and counter-intuitive claim. Based on the ratios, it seems like most people are in the same boat as me in having no idea how what you’re proposing is actually supposed to work.
I’m not really interested in a schoolteacher role-play with someone so insistent that they’re right and everyone else is wrong with zero evidence or justification, especially when you go on to denigrate and belittle people for asking you to show your work.