The abuse-bouche, if you will

The greatest democracy in the world is facing its biggest challenge since the civil war and you’re up here labeling and dividing, labeling and dividing, like you haven’t learned a fucking thing

If they lose soft power, what do they have to fall back on?

If you do call out a logical fallacy, people reply jn aLtErNaTiNg CaSe for some reason

The BQ would change their slogan to “nous autres, on l’a l’affaire!”

Is there a form of government that is inclusive? Seems to me that the practice of working to ensure that underserved demographics are represented runs counter to the thinking of the average power hungry dickhead who gravitates toward politics

You ain’t just whistlin’ Dixie

awkward sip

Oooh can you bring back the original Whopper?

I get it now, 10000 Mexican troops on the US border with Mexico, 1000 times more fentanyl seized along the Southern border, so that means ten Canadians deployed along the Northern border. Easy!

Yes, their strategy of crowbarring in the candidate their funders want via superdelegate or just unilateral appointment has really appealed to the majority of voters

Nice try Zuck

I don't think anyone expected Donnie Disgrace to get elected

I don't think he's alone. The Hamas attack was a shock to many people, and Israel of course would respond but… even six weeks ago it was starting to become obvious that this was a gross overreaction.

deleted by creator

You expect me to be better than that?

All you did up above was exactly what you accused me of doing. I pointed out a fallacy (what were the other arguments exactly? Koch/Nazi? Yeah I didn't mention them because the fallacy was the strongest part of their comment) and you created a false situation (that I "ran away" from something or other) and called that an ad hominem. Objectively incorrect.

Maybe a primer on Aristotelian logic might help you out… Unless of course you'd rather continue to dribble urine down your pant leg and present it proudly as a comment worth reading.

I expected better of Mort Pudland

Ah the ad hominem attack, the bread and butter of people who have a half-formed argument. The signal of a weak argument dressed in forceful garb.

The differences do tend to stop juuust at the part where monetary interests of their funders begin.

Aside from that, very different parties.

I think I'll ignore this