I got one that sounded even more threatening. Said your voting record is public, which is sketchy as fuck and implies who you vote for is public as well, but skirts actually saying it. It does, however, not explicitly say who you for for is secret either.
Casual Ohio voter suppression, nbd.
Failing to denounce Hamas, Palestinian journalist attacks bullet using his head as a cudgel.
I’ve had a tag on the user I think you’re referencing for a minute now. It’s quite helpful.
The problem with riling up crazy people is they are crazy, and as a result somewhat unpredictable.
Is .ee one of the ones with bad rep? I picked it randomly.
It isn’t about taking from the rich either. It’s about letting THEM take less, so there’s more for everyone else. Slight distinction, but they are the ones taking, not the workers.
He’s on a .ml instance
Is this whole instance like this? Like, is this another hexbear?
That shit is still everywhere where I am. Vote as if he’s a popular as he ever was, because in some areas he sure seems to be.
I have a little orange kitty that drools if he purrs hard enough. He first showed me this tendency as a kitten by drooling on my face when I was asleep, hahaha.
All hail the gigantic casserole.
What, and I mean this sincerely, the fuck.
So are you just one guy with a lot of time and accounts to use, or is this like, a group of people working to make these low effort bait posts? I realize that might come across as dismissive, but I’m genuinely interested. Let’s chat!
It’s like you’re not even trying.
I see. I appreciate your taking the time to explain your point of view. Still not my preferred method of engagement, but I understand better where you were coming from, and that’s what I was trying to accomplish!
Okay, fair. I asked that in that way because I believe that politicians listen primarily to corporations, sure, and secondarily to reliable voting blocs. My thought was that by proving to be an unreliable voting bloc, there’s a reasonable risk that instead of trying to court that bloc to make it turn out more, they would just go after other blocs that already are reliable.
But! You don’t think the democrats would try to court the right instead of the left if the left proves to be an unreliable voter bloc. Fair! What about the rest? We punish them via withholding of votes, they lose, and then… by what mechanism are they pushed to the left? By the loss, or is there more to the idea? What if they don’t, or don’t do it good enough? Withhold votes and make them lose again? Is there ever an adjustment to the plan, or is it just an unfortunate helping of our ideological opponents for however long it takes for the Democrats to get it right?
I’m not asking you to read minds. Just to explain how this works in your mind. I understand the frustration, and desire to express it, and the expression I’m, possibly incorrectly, assuming you have is to not vote for them. What is the process by which this accomplishes more than making Republicans win elections, and pushing the Democrats to the right?
Okay, so we punish the Democrats and the Republicans necessarily win as a result. Hopefully that’s not a controversial assumption.
How many such intentional losses should be planned on so that we can get the Democrats try to move left to recapture support? How are we going to ensure they try to better court the left instead of moving to the right?
In my 30 seconds of research I didn’t find any verification of that, but I did see a woman is pressing charges for assault on him. According to her she went to his door, rang the doorbell, and he opened the door, pepper sprayed her, then pushed/kicked her down the stairs. Added bonus story portion of the police not wanting to do their jobs.