pfife

I'm fine with you giving an answer. I just disagree with the one that you gave sorry your panties got in a bunch because someone had the audacity to disagree with YOUR reasoning for THEIR (not your) vote. Should folks just get their ballots mailed to you and MB? It seems like MY opinion on MY vote is very inconvenient for YOU and I'm a solutions oriented person. All voters' free agency with their vote is obviously secondary to your opinion and I hate that you are inconvenienced Proudly in the pro-not voting to kill spouse caucus. LOL at you not being so

cool dodge I'm beyond fine with not voting to kill my spouse in that situation. I'm also beyond fine with other people not voting to kill their spouses in that situation. No one should be compelled to do that because a dude on a message board poorly reasoned it while ordaining themselves as the decider of other peoples votes

But I didn't vote to kill my spouse. That you would seemingly conclude someone do that is really something And, your logic fails again because you again just waived your hand like a wizard and supplanted MY reasoning (not voting to kill my spouse) for MY vote with YOUR reasoning (keeping spouse alive) for MY vote. That was the second time. The first time you did it was when I said the reasoning for the vote was b/c the pol supported policies that hurt someone I care about, and you just ignored that and supplanted it with "what's best for the country" in response.

candidate a: has chance to win, supports policy that voter thinks would result in death of spouse within 2 years. candidate b: has chance to win, supports policy that voter thinks would result in death of spouse within 2 years, but country would be better. candidate c : has no chance to win, but explicitly does not support policy that voter things would result in death of spouse within 2 years. your reasoning: everyone owes their vote to candidate b. and if you had the audacity to NOT vote for candidate B, you, not everyone who voted for Candiate A, are responsible for everything candidate A does. Me: I'm not voting to kill my spouse.

So *you* get to proscibe the basis of others' votes too. If a politician supports policies that hurt people i care about, you and mbs opinions are irrelevant to my vote and your continued insistence otherwise is at minimum ridiculous

What if you dont want to vote for a politician because they will maintain policies you think make things worse for people you care about? Or is that trumped by some self appointed decider of others' votes decided differently?

So you evolved. Whats MBs reasoning got to do with it? You decided who you wanted to vote for multiple times, once happened to be for garys johnson. Why is he deciding who anyone shoulda voted for besides himself?

Withholding your vote from politicians you disagree with is what ur supposed to do

According to the text in the tweet hasan the hun was talking aboit newsome not Democrats

You look like a pedo protector every day

Why are you quoting me with your thoughts

You support the gop cover up of pedos.

I guess i missed where it was wrong to not vote for gavin newsome. There are plenty of legitimate reasons for not voting for gavin newsome

Prices up. Unemployment up. Socialism up. Maga sure knows how to pick em

Republicans are responsible for Republican outcomes.