Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Context is important, that’s how we continue the conversation.
If Candidate A is a genocidal maniac, and Candidate B is a genocidal maniac. It’s effectively a wash and pointless to say “well Candidate A supports genocide!”
It’s called a strawman to build an argument that was never made and then attack it.
It says 0 scandals right there in the post
Just because the other guy also has scandals doesn’t mean she has 0
You didn’t make this absurd claim?:
If you are victimized, you believe you then have the right to also victimize “to cancel it out”?
Context is important, that’s how we continue the conversation.
If Candidate A is a genocidal maniac, and Candidate B is a genocidal maniac. It’s effectively a wash and pointless to say “well Candidate A supports genocide!”
Hope this clarified my meaning.
Apathy has paved a basis for genocide throughout history, your view is not novel nor beneficial.
Grandoise words that mean little and contribute nothing but obviously you love the smell of your own *farts so go off.
Whatever helps you sleep at night
Apathy was too big of a word for you??
Oh I know lots of defintions. It’s especially useful sniffing out self important jackasses who love to read their own words.
Ok