Did you ever write to your congressional representatives like they suggested?
No, because I don’t support a weapons ban. That’s beside the point.
If the result was inevitable then the voters have no agency and are in no way responsible for the outcome.
I think you’re smart enough to know how a FPTP voting system works. We had 2 real options. Voters have agency as to which one of the two are elected. Stop pretending like you don’t understand how this works.
You’re giving the most heavily propagandized segment of the most heavily propagandized country on earth a lot of credit when they can’t even seem to understand that a tarrif is a tax on imports.
How sad is it then that this group understands this better than you pretend to?
You mean like how the Democrats promoted Trump thinking that he’d be an easy win for Hillary?
No, it would be like funding a third party candidate that is close to Trump with the express purpose of peeling votes off Trump.
No, because I don’t support a weapons ban. That’s beside the point.
On the contrary, that’s precisely the point.
Why do you keep acting like people who don’t support the things you do are obligated to support your preferred candidate?
If the result was inevitable then the voters have no agency and are in no way responsible for the outcome.
I think you’re smart enough to know how a FPTP voting system works.
Indeed, the party with the most votes wins.
We had 2 real options. Voters have agency as to which one of the two are elected. Stop pretending like you don’t understand how this works.
This proves that we don’t share political perspectives, because there were no real options. Just the inevitable and the also-rans.
You’re giving the most heavily propagandized segment of the most heavily propagandized country on earth a lot of credit when they can’t even seem to understand that a tarrif is a tax on imports.
How sad is it then that this group understands this better than you pretend to?
There’s no “understanding” involved, as proved by the fact that those people voted for higher prices out of “economic anxiety”. You just don’t want to admit that the Republican party is better at convincing people to vote for it than the Democrats.
No, it would be like funding a third party candidate that is close to Trump with the express purpose of peeling votes off Trump.
No, because I don’t support a weapons ban. That’s beside the point.
I think you’re smart enough to know how a FPTP voting system works. We had 2 real options. Voters have agency as to which one of the two are elected. Stop pretending like you don’t understand how this works.
How sad is it then that this group understands this better than you pretend to?
No, it would be like funding a third party candidate that is close to Trump with the express purpose of peeling votes off Trump.
On the contrary, that’s precisely the point.
Why do you keep acting like people who don’t support the things you do are obligated to support your preferred candidate?
Indeed, the party with the most votes wins.
This proves that we don’t share political perspectives, because there were no real options. Just the inevitable and the also-rans.
There’s no “understanding” involved, as proved by the fact that those people voted for higher prices out of “economic anxiety”. You just don’t want to admit that the Republican party is better at convincing people to vote for it than the Democrats.
They do that too, hence the Libertarian party.