Hodad

Agreed that timing matters. You don't cross certain lines. Earlier is safer. Public is safer. But I don't necessarily agree about a lie by omission--at least not to a degree that it's outside social norms for getting to know someone. Like many of those other examples, I think people omit a lot of details that could make them challenging or incompatible partners and don't reveal those things until they get to know people and establish some level of comfort. And then at a certain point, or when it becomes relevant, it becomes appropriate to share those details. Nobody leads with "I'm an alcoholic," or "I'm on antidepressants so I don't have much of a libido," or whatever. Those deeper truths usually come out after a few dates. And if we want to flip the script, he clearly didn't lead with "I'm an abusive a-hole with anger control problems." To be clear though, his reaction wasn't out of anger at her. Like most abusers, he was punishing her for triggering his insecurities. His being attracted to her challenged his sense of masculinity and heterosexuality. He was disgusted with himself and that manifested as anger at her for "making" him feel that way. "Look what you made me do!"

I'm actually going to side with her on this. There's a lot of potentially disqualifying traits in terms of sexual or relationship compatibility. Whether it's kids, infertility divorce, religion, politics, circumcision, endometriosis, whatever... Typically, people don't disclose all of these things upon meeting. They go out, get to know one another a bit and then decide if they are interested enough in the other person to want to progress the relationship--to work through or around potential challenges or not. I don't see how this is fundamentally different. After they've spent some time together they can decide whether it's an issue, and if so, if it's an issue worth dealing with.

Jewish. Space. Lasers. Starting forest fires. It's hard to imagine what overly negative would look like. ?

Only "kinda"? We must not be explaining it properly. ?

Sorry, but disapproving of the guy who just kicked your ass in the election is not a justification to attempt a coup. In a democracy, the voters get to choose their leaders. They chose Biden over Trump--by a lot. Your post rather neatly proves that @Aristides is correct: you DO want a dictatorship instead of a democracy.

Sure, if you ignore the attempted coup, in which he literally tried to seize power against the will of the electorate. Just that little ol' thing. ?

This is a poor quality post with no information in it. Please do better.

Ah, the intellectual rigor we've come to expect from you: random images of dubious provenance substituted for an actual argument.

^^This does not track logically. The Democratic machine has nothing to do with Republican candor. If candidates want to repudiate Trump they can simply do it. They can simply BE honest. There are a lot of Republicans in office and prominently elsewhere in the party that don't support Trump--who recognize what a, vile, ugly disaster he was from the first moment he rode down that escalator to announce. Most of them are simply cowards, with the exception of a few outliers like Romney and Cheney. They are afraid that Trump's deplorables will punish them--and they are right to be afraid. But that's why it takes courage to live by one's convictions.

Registered independent here. You just think I'm a partisan because the Republicans lost their collective minds when a Black man was elected president and set a trajectory that lead so far off rails that they are entirely unpalatable at this point. I have no interest in the politics of spite and there will be no chance of a Republican earning my vote unless they thoroughly and vocally repudiate the disaster that is Trumpism.

Deluge, meet Deluge. ^^ This is what happens when people have no principles or intellectual standards. They will simply say whatever is convenient in the moment.

You are correct. No one has to "prove" their accusations. If people choose not to support their accusations, that is their prerogative. The natural consequence of that is that we will think the accuser shallow, stupid, crazy etc. depending on how wild the claims are. Multiple investigations at the local and state levels and 60 court cases laughed out of court, and not a bit of evidence to support wide scale election fraud. So in the case of election deniers, both stupid and crazy would apply.?

?That "article" is an opinion piece, poorly reasoned and poorly written. He's as welcome to his opinion as you are to yours. And I'm welcome to call you both out with my opinion. That's how opinions work. If you want to talk facts, let's talk about facts. Like the attempted coup and the extortion for campaign aid. You know, facts.

Jeebus. I feel like this is a pure glimpse inside the festering conspiracy cesspool that is your mind. This is what it looks like inside. Just a cacophony of toxic hate 24/7. Unplug from the internet and go seek help.

That is an asinine article. Joe Biden is as establishment as they come. Vanilla. Very old vanilla. Get back to me when we come anywhere near impeachable abuses of power, let alone an attempted coup. Maybe he'll call Zelensky and threaten to withhold military aid from Ukraine unless Zelensky slanders his Republican opponent. ?

That's right, Trump is not a dictator. Thanks to Mike Pence we narrowly avoided a coup attempt and we don't have to figure out what Trump actually is in a post-democratic United States. Rather, in a still democratic United States, we know exactly what he is: a one-term mistake now under criminal indictment.

I'm not sure he can explain it slower. You're simply wrong. "Delegates" refers to the already elected congresspeople from each state and the "state delegation" refers to the entire set from each state. Whether that is one (AK, WY, etc.) or 52 (CA), each delegation gets a single vote. You should just absorb the information, learn and move on. Indeed, the contingent election would have been a foregone conclusion that overturned the will of the voters entirely. That's why team Trump tried so hard to make it happen. They weren't "challenging" the election. They were trying to steal it outright through means they knew to be illegal.

A number of the Jan 6 rioters have admitted that they were wrong and expressed remorse. Are some of them self-serving statements? Probably. But there are also men and women of honor who have recognized the gravity of what they did. Honor is a totally foreign concept to WestCanMan, so this will fall on deaf ears (or blind eyes).

Someone needs to up his dosage. I see your still flogging your magic TV that can show the future. Amazing that you haven't yet won the lottery!

FYI, Trump was drone striking at 3x the Obama rate. They just made it policy not to report on casualties.

Have you been over at WestCanMan's house watching his TV that shows the future? No fair, the rest of us have to wait until the "manifesto" is released.

Political, it's risky, for sure, but principles should rise above politics. The one thing in your post that I really disagree with is that Trump will get top lawyers. So far, he has been TERRIBLE at picking lawyers. They are carney barkers like Trump, but that sideshow atmosphere has not been rewarded in court.

Why? There is not evidence that the vaccines have any impact on fertility. COVID, on the other hand, can. Their fertility is more secure having been vaccinated.

Actually, I assumed that was the case because Connally was and Barnes was part of his contingent on the mission. My mistake. Conservative Texas Democrat.

No, no. Remember how your colleagues held you down and injected you against your will? You were forced! Or, perhaps, we are all subject to conditional employment and really conditional participation in society. Wear your hard-hat, get your license, show up sober, dress appropriately etc. -- You're correct. Nobody was forced to vaccinate. It did become conditional for some things and was a matter of convenience for others. In exactly the same way that vaccines are conditional for school in some areas or for travel to certain countries etc. If one wishes to refuse to participate in community protection through vaccination, they sometimes have to figure out some alternate arrangements. Those are choices people make.