229
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 28 points 2 years ago

This is implying Jill Stein doesn’t know she is helping Republicans with her failed 3rd party run.

[-] [email protected] 16 points 2 years ago

Girl is getting paid to help them for sure.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

do you have some proof of that?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

She had a successful career as a physician so no, you're making that up. Anyone who is saying she has money that's where it came from. You all have no evidence she's getting Russian money, it's pathetic.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago

Sorry... are you saying that doctors all feel they're rich enough and don't ever lust for more money?

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

My evidence of what? I asked if that's what you were saying.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

Evidence that Jill Stein is taking money from Putin, it's a ridiculous claim with no evidence.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Please quote me making that claim.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

Your white knight ass galloped in to defend that point

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

When did I defend anything? Please quote my defense. Unless you're lying of course. Are you lying?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

LMAO you can't even troll effectively

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

I guess you were lying and rather than admit it, you've resorted to insults.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

You think "rich people don't do immoral things for money, because they're already rich" don't you?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

No, they just have literally no evidence.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

she's not helping republicans.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Pulling the environmentalist voters away from Biden doesn't help his opponents?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

the greens are his opponent too. a vote for a green candidate doesn't help the republicans or the democrats.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

And who do you think might consider voting for a Green candidate? Certainly not republicans. There is significant overlap between the democracy crowd and the environmentalism crowd. Thus, a significant chunk of green voters would otherwise be democratic voters.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

then i guess the democrats better shift to capture some of them green voters if they want them.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

That attitude is precisely why we were stuck with Trump from 2017-2020, and why the country is much worse off now because of it.

I voted for Gary Johnson is 2016 and let me tell you, I learned from my mistake. It seems you have yet to learn that lesson.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

? you think the democrats should be able to enter office just because you don't like donald trump? fuck that. if they want my vote they better come and get it. i have an enumrable list.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

The fact that you keep changing the subject demonstrates that you are not interested in arguing in good faith. The correct course of action is to vote in such a way that your vote influences the outcome positively. By voting for a 3rd party candidate, you are choosing to not influence the result, which is irresponsible.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

your accusation of bad faith is itself bad faith.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

"No u" you're not digging yourself out of that hole

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

doubling down doesn't change the facts

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

I haven't changed the subject at all.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

You changed the subject from preventing fascism to nitpicking democrats. That's called whataboutism. You imply that you have no legitimate counter-argument by taking attention away from the point that shatters your argument. A person in the right would have no need for such evasive tactics.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

I'm not being evasive

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

it's not whataboutism

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

you can characterize my vote any way you like. I'll characterize yours as supporting genocide.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Don't pretend you care about genocide when you've clearly announced your plan to enable a known terrorist.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

I have no plans to enable genocide. by contrast many in this thread have announced their plan to vote for biden

this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
229 points (100.0% liked)

News

31214 readers
249 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS