g0nz0li0

As you well know, I’m specifically calling out your comment about it first being used to test if it made the working class more docile. You’re too proud and stubborn to admit you’re wrong. Or you’re just a total idiot. I’m starting to think it’s probably the latter 😂

You already posted that link, and I already told you it doesn’t support your argument. I’m not interested in your view at all, I am just here to point out your double standard. Happy to keep doing so.

My only point is to let you know that you’re being disingenuous. You made a claim without evidence and then literally said “You have anything says that ingesting or actually helps?” to the person who rebutted you.

That’s exactly my fucking point.

Are you so singularly interested in proving you are right that you don’t bother to read or try to genuinely comprehend what other people write when they are calling you out for your bad behaviour?

The source you posted doesn’t mention anything to support your statement about fluoride originally being used to test if it could keep the working class docile. The fact remains that you are asking others to source themselves despite being unwilling, unable, or disinterested in doing so yourself.

Still I am glad you’re voting for Harris 🙂

Casually states without evidence that fluoride was only introduced to keep people docile, then demands citations on rebuttals. Looks like we got ourselves a full blown case of the MAGA.

Yeah but these guys are above the law, so it won’t matter.

Still, the closeness of the race bears repeating what has become something of a mantra here at 538 recently: A close race in the polls does not necessarily mean the outcome will be close. All seven swing states are still within a normal polling error of going to the candidate who is currently “losing”in each. While the polls have identified a close race, our model shows what you should expect if those polls are off.

Margin-of-error polling cannot tell us anything other than that it is too close to call. These headlines are just capitalising on the attention ahead of the actual election.

People everywhere googling whether consuming bronzer + saturated fat leads to E. coli

💯%

Yeah, it’s grubby AF. I get that the strategy is to normalise calling your opponent a loser so it feels matter of fact, but it’s absolutely fucked that this is how major political candidates and operations work nowadays.

(Also, Harris won the last election, won the nom, and is still up in the polls, whereas Trump has lost so many major contests since 2016 he’s uniquely qualified to be called a loser)

“No, I’ll let you know when I will be. I will be someday, we all will be someday, but I’ll be the first to let you know,” Trump added.

“Trust me bro”

Yeah, I’m not interested in what most lemmings think is a bad or a good argument.

🤡

deleted by creator

Are you suggesting that because people aren’t as excited now as they were when Biden first dropped out and endorsed Harris, she’s tanking?

If you are, this is a bad argument. Anyone who knows politics knows her momentum was always going to slow, and polls will ebb and flow.

The polls have shown this is a historically close election, it has been since Harris announced and will be until election day.

RIP brother

Sleepwalking by the Jaguar Club. https://youtu.be/EZU3zV33tYM

One Must Fall 2097 theme. https://youtu.be/pdVnKYcYi3g?si=g3DMymI7KQV8Vifh

Anything from the 1974 anime Jack and the Beanstalk OST but this: https://youtu.be/Ehqopzmx258?si=jQaKJRglCZkSLwFt

We must block Donald Trump, which is why we urge Uncommitted voters to vote against him and avoid third-party candidates that could inadvertently boost his chances

Isn’t this just saying vote for Harris?

Also, what’s the alternative being promoted? If responding to, debunking, and rebuking the lies of Trump/Vance is “pointing fingers” and adding to negative discourse, then are they suggesting to just shut up about it and let the lies go unchecked? How does that serve anyone’s interest?

Feels like normative bias and the naive belief that Trump can’t cause any real damage and everything will be fine in the end.

Curse words themselves don’t reduce the impact of a sentence on their own. Context is important.

I’ll try ask this in a different way: can you think of a time when a curse word seemed to fit the context of the point being made, or enhanced the impact, or felt powerful or eloquent? Can you remember and share the context of it?