But it was not going to win the election, much less restore the republic.
We knew being not the other guy was not enough, that the other guys are nazis, that the electorate does not know that.
So explain to me why forcing a doomed to fail strategy is not disqualifying for dem establishment figures?
Even now you regurgitate their projections of blame? Why should anyone trust your analysis of anything if you still trust those establishment conservatives to run the dem party while you are at it?
The reasonable choice was to vote for Kamala out of sheer harm reduction. Throwing a hissy fit and taking your ball and going home because you think we should be playing a different game helped nobody.
You are vote shaming which is neither here nor there.
The question is knowing status quo candidates whose only selling point is they are harm reduction, was not enough to win, let alone with the most unpopular candidate they had on offer, never breaching 30 pc approval all term pre anointation, the vp of a prez at 40 pc for 3 years.
You knew the situation, but trusted the same people that gave us hillary and biden, to run a doomed to fail strategy.
So how is it reasonable to appoint kamala, and accept her and the status quo strategy knowing it was throwing the game?
I’m Canadian dipshit, I don’t have any particular connection to one party or the other. It was clear as day that Kamala was a status quo politician, and Trump was going to do pretty much what he is doing. Actually I didn’t think Trump would be this bad in fact.
There is just no universe where you justify that having a milquetoast politician is worse than whatever the fuck this fascist nightmare is. And it was clear as day to anyone who wasn’t an abject moron.
Typical, counter attacking, however lamely, to avoid taking responsibility. You have no logical arguments so you have to resort to those tricks the dem establishment taught you to stop any realignment.
More proof your analysis, stated opinions, are worth nothing to those in reality. Either pretending to believe dems are a credible party and lying to our faces, or believing it.
If the former you would think neoliberal surrender to fascists is in your interest, so your understanding is laughably wrong and disqualifying in either case.
Kamala was objectively a better choice than Trump, it was obvious to anyone who wasn’t brain rotted by people like Rogan.
Syphillis is objectively better than aids.
But it was not going to win the election, much less restore the republic.
We knew being not the other guy was not enough, that the other guys are nazis, that the electorate does not know that.
So explain to me why forcing a doomed to fail strategy is not disqualifying for dem establishment figures?
Even now you regurgitate their projections of blame? Why should anyone trust your analysis of anything if you still trust those establishment conservatives to run the dem party while you are at it?
This is parody, right?
You cannot be serious. I levied questions about how the election was thrown by the dems from the start.
You cannot answer with reason.
The reasonable choice was to vote for Kamala out of sheer harm reduction. Throwing a hissy fit and taking your ball and going home because you think we should be playing a different game helped nobody.
You are vote shaming which is neither here nor there.
The question is knowing status quo candidates whose only selling point is they are harm reduction, was not enough to win, let alone with the most unpopular candidate they had on offer, never breaching 30 pc approval all term pre anointation, the vp of a prez at 40 pc for 3 years.
You knew the situation, but trusted the same people that gave us hillary and biden, to run a doomed to fail strategy.
So how is it reasonable to appoint kamala, and accept her and the status quo strategy knowing it was throwing the game?
I’m Canadian dipshit, I don’t have any particular connection to one party or the other. It was clear as day that Kamala was a status quo politician, and Trump was going to do pretty much what he is doing. Actually I didn’t think Trump would be this bad in fact.
There is just no universe where you justify that having a milquetoast politician is worse than whatever the fuck this fascist nightmare is. And it was clear as day to anyone who wasn’t an abject moron.
You call me a dipshit, but I knew kamala would lose and you did not.
What does that make you?
Haha both sides bad haha
Typical, counter attacking, however lamely, to avoid taking responsibility. You have no logical arguments so you have to resort to those tricks the dem establishment taught you to stop any realignment.
More proof your analysis, stated opinions, are worth nothing to those in reality. Either pretending to believe dems are a credible party and lying to our faces, or believing it.
If the former you would think neoliberal surrender to fascists is in your interest, so your understanding is laughably wrong and disqualifying in either case.