There’s no “wishing” going on here. I’m explaining how your concept of how voting has cause and effect reversed and you’re pretending that it’s “wishes” instead of basic political literacy.
People should be smart enough to work backward from a foregone conclusion: We’re getting the Dem or Rep nominee.
Not if the voters vote for someone else. You’re only assuming that the two major parties are inevitable because you’re drinking their kool-aid.
If they can’t convince people to vote for them then they lose. It’s on them to convince us, but you’ve already decided that they don’t need to because they’re owed your vote. You have deliberately rejected your civic duty to the nation in favor of blind obedience to the party just like Washington warned us about.
Damn that’s crazy because here’s me before the election telling the future. How in the world did I perform this feat? Do I have amazing powers of precognition?
Again, you’re telling us what you’d wish would happen. I was telling them what would happen.
Damn that’s crazy because here’s me before the election telling the future. How in the world did I perform this feat? Do I have amazing powers of precognition?
Did you ever write to your congressional representatives like they suggested?
Again, you’re telling us what you’d wish would happen. I was telling them what would happen.
If the result was inevitable then the voters have no agency and are in no way responsible for the outcome.
What’s more is this is a concept that both the GOP and their voters understand.
You’re giving the most heavilly 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.
It’s why the GOP funds campaigns like Stein and gets others like RFK Jr. to bow out.
You mean like how the Democrats promoted Trump thinking that he’d be an easy win for Hillary?
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.
There’s no “wishing” going on here. I’m explaining how your concept of how voting has cause and effect reversed and you’re pretending that it’s “wishes” instead of basic political literacy.
Not if the voters vote for someone else. You’re only assuming that the two major parties are inevitable because you’re drinking their kool-aid.
If they can’t convince people to vote for them then they lose. It’s on them to convince us, but you’ve already decided that they don’t need to because they’re owed your vote. You have deliberately rejected your civic duty to the nation in favor of blind obedience to the party just like Washington warned us about.
You first.
Damn that’s crazy because here’s me before the election telling the future. How in the world did I perform this feat? Do I have amazing powers of precognition?
Again, you’re telling us what you’d wish would happen. I was telling them what would happen.
Did you ever write to your congressional representatives like they suggested?
If the result was inevitable then the voters have no agency and are in no way responsible for the outcome.
You’re giving the most heavilly 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.
You mean like how the Democrats promoted Trump thinking that he’d be an easy win for Hillary?
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.