This applies to the intolerant trying to gain power to inflict their intolerance on the wider society, not performing odious acts within their own families. It doesn’t make sense here at all. We shouldn’t tolerate murders because they’re murders, not because we’re going to end up with a surprise caliphate.
A) My student government certainly didn’t have a budget worthy of boycotting anything.
B) Do it anyway. Boycotts are speech, you’re in California, and students aren’t obligated to do anything because the school would prefer it. Hell, do it because they told you not to.
C) Don’t boycott a specific country. Boycott all countries found to be plausibly engaging in genocide. Or all countries currently occupying extraterritorial land. Or all countries currently engaged in large scale offensive military operations. Give an exception for the US of A because you’re so patriotic. Israel is in a small club of rogue nations and we don’t generally do business with them.
The leading edge of the Nazi thought machine is already saying it.
https://bsky.app/profile/elnorterecuerda.bsky.social/post/3lsyrlsj3wc2x
These aren’t contractors. They’re mercenaries.
Lol, sure man. Definitely no one ever makes an argument in an editorial. It’s not possible as their opponent is not present, may not even read it, and frequently will not be allowed to publish a rebuttal to the same audience.
Arguments are about the audience, not the opponent. Making a straw man when your opponent is not present is the most common form of the fallacy. When they’re there they might just say that’s not what they’re argument is.
Lol, what? Do you seriously think you cannot create a straw man argument in anything but direct debate? Sure Mr. Smartman.
Hint, logical fallacies are about the logic, not the debate.
Just because you feel like the straw men deserve it doesn’t change that you’re arguing with hypotheticals versions you’ve created instead of actual people.
You’ve literally defined the argument of an opposing group to look stupid so you can dunk on them. You’re arguing with a straw man. This isn’t even a critique of your rhetorical basis though, it’s just normal Internet lameness.
Millions upon millions of Americans have not defended the 2nd on anti-tyranny grounds. Most of them just have a hobby and think their AR-15 will someday defend their innocent white wife from bands of dangerous minorities. The 2nd Amendment people who actually believe in violent revolution (or the threat thereof) as the backstop of democracy are a tiny minority. We’d need something like “well-regulated militias” for that.
It’s a very American viewpoint to believe that sentiments just spring up organically with no influence from political leaders and their role in the whole process is to take opinion polls and only then decide what they believe.
Taking away the microphones of hate-mongers doesn’t make hate cease to exist, but it pushes it back into the shadows and cuts off an avenue for it to breed. The US would be a less hateful and less fascist place if Donald Trump was in prison. Leaders can drive the conversation and mainstream fringe ideas. The Democratic establishment just chooses not to.
Yes, that’s exactly what they’re talking about and you’re being extremely weird in making it a priority of discussion on something at best tangentially related.
It’s just a straw man writ large because you’re miffed at another online argument you had somewhere else.
New Zealand recently just punished three politicians harshly for doing the Haka. They were protesting a proposed law to strip special constitutional privileges for the Maori stemming from the original colonial treaties. Those old British colonizers were apparently too respectful to the rights of the indigenous people for modern conservatives.
How come our centrists become household names for all the times they fuck the party over while their’s are people I’ve never heard of before?
And this is the issue that was worth having a meltdown over. Not any of the kidnapping, not Trump’s tariffs and market manipulation, not Adams’ corruption or Cuomo’s COVID scandals. Their utter silence on everything else makes their current freak out transparently hollow. None of them are worried about NYC, they’re worried about the idea of the uberwealthy getting taxed to make life better for everyone else catching on.
Glad you like it!
If you haven’t previously seen Rogue One, it’s also great. Watch it after Andor, as the story basically just continues directly. I love the originals, but Rogue One might be my favorite Star Wars movie. I’m much more captured by the idea of the rebellion as regular people striving for freedom than the light sabers and magic.
Holy crap, zero percent?? There was some iffy “not enough black support” conversations going on during 2020 that were warped by just how much black support Biden was getting, but you really should be getting more than zero.
It’s shocking how much we had all just internalized seeing plastic bag litter. Our ban really did have a noticeable effect on the trash lying around. It’s not just an invisible benefit “for the planet”.
There’s no real solution for selection bias if you don’t have other respondents of that group. With something like race or education, you have their demographics and can upsample those that do respond. But it the group is specifically defined by not wanting to respond to polls and that comes with biases to the poll questions, you don’t have anything to upsample.
Now whether such a group is really a distinct entity out there that can’t be kind of approximated by people who share other traits is the question. If white conservatives have a spectrum of trust in pollsters and the non-responders would just answer questions the same you’re fine. But it those with low trust are also more anti-vax or some sort of distinct population like an insular community, you couldn’t just approximate them with people who did respond.
I do wonder whether the story here is that the non-voting population largely mirrors the popular vote. This was the first time in their survey the Republican won the popular vote and the first time their non-voting respondents went toward the Republican candidate.
Which isn’t entirely surprising, as both that’s probably driving the vibes and many non-voters are not apolitical, but just don’t vote because their elections are not competitive.
Oh look, more fake election results. You need to stop saying things until you can recognize when a “factoid” isn’t even remotely close to believable reality.