davidagain

They want men to choose who lives or dies. They absolutely do not want women to be in charge of anything. That's why no exceptions in the case of rape and incest. A man made a decision, they don't want a woman to have the power to reverse it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg_disaster

Likely static charge from a cloud causing hydrogen to ignite. Hydrogen burns freely at all concentrations both very low and very high and is therefore far, far more flammable even than natural gas, so I'm afraid hydrogen airships will always be a catastrophe waiting to happen.

Maybe check out the article we're posting under, or does Tim Walz not count as a Democrat in your worldview?

Why do you think Donald "finish them" "best King of Israel" "Biden is trying to hold Netanyahu back, he should be doing the opposite" Trump would be better for Gaza, or how do you think anyone other than Harris or Trump could become president, or how do you think that letting Trump win absolves you of complicity? Inaction is a moral choice, and it's not like you haven't been warmed that Trump is today the most fascist candidate this close to the presidency in our lifetimes.

And the republicans pick rational, honourable, sensible, caring and responsible candidates?

Some red states label cross dressing in front of children a sex crime, so they offer the chance to go to prison for wearing clothes they disapprove of! Not the easiest environment for exploring your gender.

Oh, the Republicans care. They care about their weird and nasty desire to opress trans folk a great deal.

I appreciate it. I think we might be able to agree that the genocide needs to stop immediately, and also that if she wins, Kamala Harris needs to make it an absolute top priority as soon as she gets into the oval office!

This is very true. It has happened so many times.

It was straight after you seemed to be criticising "vote blue no matter who" and appeared to be equating voting for Harris with voting for Netanyahu, which sounds a lot like advocating not voting for Harris to me. Certainly it's how a bunch of self-declared "leftists" argue right before they show their true colours and advocate for actions more likely to bring about a Trump win. But no, true, you didn't actually get that far.

prole clearly had the same impression about where you were coming from with their response. I didn't push it because you pretty immediately said you would be voting for Harris, but I think I was right to bring a bit of balance, because it all seemed a bit one sided about which candidate supports Netanyahu and the world in general needed reminding that Trump is pretty vocally supportive of the genocide in Gaza.

I take your point, though, because I think I did treat you as if you were advocating for abstention, which you didn't explicitly do, but to be fair, neither did I explicitly accuse you of it.

I do think we should chalk this one up to us both reading a bit more into what each other were saying than what was actually said. Either way, I apologise for making you feel criticised for things you didn't say.

So you're happy to let Donald "finish them" "best king of Israel" "Biden shouldn't try to hold Netanyahu back, he should do the opposite" Trump lead the western world?!? I think you really need to reexamine the effect of your actions.

I genuinely think I didn't say anything about you, except when I mistakenly thought you claimed you pretended to advocate for third parties. It's the advocating for throwing away your vote that I always object to.

So I'm asking where I said something where you felt criticised as secretly pro trump, because unless you advocated that principled folk throw away their vote, I don't think I did.