If intent matters and results don’t, I’ll write in my favorite fictional candidate!
If intent matters and results don’t, I’ll write in my favorite fictional candidate!
His communications director who?
Saw this on Mastodon:
Did it? I didn’t bother with the article, and only shared a screenshot of a post about the headline.
On top of the likelihood that a ban would be very politically expensive, distracting, and watered down to pointlessness.
The pouches seem like less plastic.
All true. I feel like the Arlington scandal has legs, though.
Especially EVs, or especially Teslas?
When did brute force switch from being an antipattern to the preferred pattern?
Just strategically, doesn’t AIPAC contribute too much to Republicans to be considered an ally?
“LGBTQ advocates say”? This seems objectively marginalizing.
This all presumes your arrogant take is correct. But please, continue your lonely war against platitudes by using platitudes. I just won’t see it.
Take your topic policing elsewhere, please.
You don’t get to declare a related topic as out of bounds like that.
Its not contextually relevant to the situation of the article.
😶
The societal indictment is exactly how I read it. Why would people take it the worst possible way?
That’s not how I read it. Se my other reply.
I’m just shocked at the vanity of people aggressively voting third party. They value the purity of their voting record more than other people’s lives. They think they’re the first generation to figure out morality or the secret cheat code to change the system.