Fuck off you imbecile. Its not about bias its about severity. You truly lack critical thinking skills if you cant parse the rule that is vaguely being applied in the title. I cant give those to you. Please, kindly, fuck the fuck off.
Well then, please do a breakdown of your rule and explain how you get severity instead of bias. Show me how I’m wrong.
But somehow I doubt you’re going to do that because deep down you know you’re wrong and you just can’t admit being wrong. Instead you’re going to make some vague excuse how you can’t be bothered to try and explain to an imbecile like me who truly lacks critical thinking and is intellectually dishonest. Don’t be like every dipshit I’ve had the displeasure of talking to, be special, take a stand.
I know what words means, none of those words are in your title so unless you explain how you get to those words from your title I have no fucking idea what you’re talking about.
Really living up to that republican brain. Please read again what I asked.
please do a breakdown of your rule and explain how you get severity instead of bias.
Seems I need to spell it out what that means. This entire comment tree is about whether the title of your post makes sense or not. I’m claiming it doesn’t make sense because if you apply it objectively to all the presidential candidates it makes it very easy to dismiss a candidate because only questioning is enough to consider someone unfit. You’re arguing it makes sense because of “severity”. You do not use that word in your title and I don’t see a single instance of anything indicating anything about “severity”. For your argument to make any sense you need to explain how severity is derived from your title. If you add severity after the fact then that just proves the original title didn’t make sense.
Fuck off you imbecile. Its not about bias its about severity. You truly lack critical thinking skills if you cant parse the rule that is vaguely being applied in the title. I cant give those to you. Please, kindly, fuck the fuck off.
Well then, please do a breakdown of your rule and explain how you get severity instead of bias. Show me how I’m wrong.
But somehow I doubt you’re going to do that because deep down you know you’re wrong and you just can’t admit being wrong. Instead you’re going to make some vague excuse how you can’t be bothered to try and explain to an imbecile like me who truly lacks critical thinking and is intellectually dishonest. Don’t be like every dipshit I’ve had the displeasure of talking to, be special, take a stand.
Do you understand the word severity? How about risk? Do you know any of these words little one?
I know what words means, none of those words are in your title so unless you explain how you get to those words from your title I have no fucking idea what you’re talking about.
Of course you dont know. You dont have critical thinking skills.
Which is why I asked you to explain it. How about you use your superior critical thinking and actually understand what I’m saying?
Severity (trump):
How many allegations were made against Trump?
1? 2? Countless?
How many felony convictions did Trump have?
1? 2? 34?
Did Trump have clear connections to known sex trafficker epstein?
Yes.
Severity (biden):
Were there any allegations made against Biden?
No
Has biden ever been convicted of a felony?
No
Did biden have any connection to any known sex trafficker?
No
See how Im doing all the hard thinking for you? See how Im actually weighing facts?
Try it sometime.
Really living up to that republican brain. Please read again what I asked.
Seems I need to spell it out what that means. This entire comment tree is about whether the title of your post makes sense or not. I’m claiming it doesn’t make sense because if you apply it objectively to all the presidential candidates it makes it very easy to dismiss a candidate because only questioning is enough to consider someone unfit. You’re arguing it makes sense because of “severity”. You do not use that word in your title and I don’t see a single instance of anything indicating anything about “severity”. For your argument to make any sense you need to explain how severity is derived from your title. If you add severity after the fact then that just proves the original title didn’t make sense.
Sorry, its obvious to me you dont understand context or how language is used. Its a two sentence title, not a thesis. Please, figure your shit out.