dogslayeggs

You love to see it.

You said Hamas hides behind children, which is why you wholeheartedly disagree with Israel being morally worse than people who are not Hamas based on children killing. I have no other way to interpret that besides you thinking its OK to kill kids as long as Israel is targeting terrorists who might be hiding there.

So in your mind, it's totally cool to murder innocent women, men, and children as long as there is a chance that terrorists who are currently hiding might possibly be killed in the process?

A violent crime can be anything from punching another kid in highschool (remember, they are 17 and highschool boys fight sometimes) to murder.

Just make a goddamn Maverick EV. I really like my hybrid Maverick, but an EV would be perfect.

It's almost like, and hear me out, making EVs that are both expensive AND have very little range is a dumb idea. Make it cheap, small, and low range? Awesome, perfect little city car. Make it expensive but bigger and high range? Sure, at least it adds utility to justify the price.

Those are two words that should never be put next to each other.

No, this is a calculated move. Her brain isn't mush. She just lacks sympathy for others and is willing to sell her soul for a guaranteed financial future.

Not good for anyone. This will hurt Iran, because the US will be stupid enough to defend Israel. This will hurt Palestinians, because the US will send more shit to Israel that will be used against Palestinians. This will hurt Israeli terrorists (slightly). This will hurt Israeli civilians who oppose the genocide.

Just because Labour wasn't in power doesn't mean people weren't unhappy with them. I remember watching the news interviews at the time, and some of the people who voted to Exit said they didn't really want to Exit they just wanted to put out a protest vote against Corbyn. Also, polls showed at the time that only 52% of Labour voters thought Labour was in favor of Remain, so there was generally bad messaging by Labour.

Look, you can argue that the single issue is so important it should take precedence, but the end result of not voting for Harris means... even more genocide! So go ahead and single issue vote on something that will get you more of what you don't want. Anyone voting for Stein in a swing state is either someone who gains something from the 3rd party getting more votes, or is someone who doesn't understand the implications of a Trump presidency. If you live in CA or AL or OK or NY, sure, protest against Harris.

Also, I like how you blame the Democrats for Trump winning when the people actually voted. The people deserve some blame for the consequence of their actions. Yes, Clinton was a shitty candidate who I predicted losing because everyone hates her so much... but in the end there were a lot of people who are now worse off because they decided it would be better to vote for Stein.

Eh, he never bet on any games he was involved with (according to him, and MLB never claimed they had proof he did). Sure, ban him from playing anymore, but the dude is a legend of the game and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. I'm pretty sure the reason they never relented was because he was an asshole that nobody liked.

It's almost like being a single issue voter is moronic.

Also, protest votes only hurt everyone and help nobody in a voting system like we have. Look at Brexit: most of those were protest votes against Labour, not actual votes for Brexit. Or look at the votes for Jill Stein in Michigan, where she got more votes than Clinton lost by. Every pregnant woman in the US is at higher risk now because of those protest votes.