Crimson said:But he is also super eco friendly and has been open about his more "leftist" views, including those involving female empowerment.
His stances have nothing to do with what stances he's otherwise endorsing by proxy.
If an atheist advertises for Chic Fillet, that doesn't mean that Chic Fillet is atheistic.
Crimson said:But he is also super eco friendly and has been open about his more "leftist" views, including those involving female empowerment.His stances have nothing to do with what stances he's otherwise endorsing by proxy.
If an atheist advertises for Chic Fillet, that doesn't mean that Chic Fillet is atheistic.
you miss my point, I was just clarifying why I believe he learns right and it's got nothing to do with the oppression of women.
i was wondering where you got your opinions from, lol
me? Oh well clearly now I don't agree with you I must have some other male figure telling me what to think. I am just a mentally vulnerable girl after all lacking the ability to think critically.
Crimson said:But he is also super eco friendly and has been open about his more "leftist" views, including those involving female empowerment.His stances have nothing to do with what stances he's otherwise endorsing by proxy.
If an atheist advertises for Chic Fillet, that doesn't mean that Chic Fillet is atheistic.you miss my point, I was just clarifying why I believe he learns right and it's got nothing to do with the oppression of women.
How is voting for a candidate who will endorse and push forth people who'd work against woman's rights not a gradual form of oppression?
Crimson said:But he is also super eco friendly and has been open about his more "leftist" views, including those involving female empowerment.His stances have nothing to do with what stances he's otherwise endorsing by proxy.
If an atheist advertises for Chic Fillet, that doesn't mean that Chic Fillet is atheistic.you miss my point, I was just clarifying why I believe he learns right and it's got nothing to do with the oppression of women.
How is voting for a candidate who will endorse and push forth people who'd work against woman's rights not a gradual form of oppression?
given we have seen how trump governs, it's unlikely we will see much in the way of damaging oppression in the next four years.
Need I point out Trump's administration launched a global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality.
And if we do see some liberties you value abolished, what's the cost? You want to stand by your ideals while ignoring the countless balls trump is juggling, and doing so well?
like I said, it's always a trade off, and in another 4 years those liberties, if curtailed, could be reinstated. This isn't just about now, although it requires quick action and trump is moving fast, think long game.
and maybe bare in mind how china views women and LGBTQ+
edit:
Just thought too, trump employees a lot of women
and he's never said anything particularly sexist imo
when he said that grab em by the pussy shit he was just spilling the truth, people act like golddiggers ain't chasing young billionaires. and he said it in private, in a locker room, with a guy in a similar position.
Crimson said:But he is also super eco friendly and has been open about his more "leftist" views, including those involving female empowerment.His stances have nothing to do with what stances he's otherwise endorsing by proxy.
If an atheist advertises for Chic Fillet, that doesn't mean that Chic Fillet is atheistic.you miss my point, I was just clarifying why I believe he learns right and it's got nothing to do with the oppression of women.
How is voting for a candidate who will endorse and push forth people who'd work against woman's rights not a gradual form of oppression?
given we have seen how trump governs, it's unlikely we will see much in the way of damaging oppression in the next four years.
Pro-Life policies aren't damaging?
Need I point out Trump's administration launched a global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality.
What does that have to do with anything? I was talking about women's rights.
And if we do see some liberties you value abolished, what's the cost?
You say that like the costs are negligent.
You want to stand by your ideals while ignoring the countless balls trump is juggling, and doing so well?
What balls are those again?
like I said, it's always a trade off, and in another 4 years those liberties, if curtailed, could be reinstated. This isn't just about now, although it requires quick action and trump is moving fast, think long game.
Do you figure it'd do no damages to the environment, and that social changes are that simplistic?
"Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither." - Ben Franklin
and maybe bare in mind how china views women and LGBTQ+
Racist.
Crimson said:But he is also super eco friendly and has been open about his more "leftist" views, including those involving female empowerment.His stances have nothing to do with what stances he's otherwise endorsing by proxy.
If an atheist advertises for Chic Fillet, that doesn't mean that Chic Fillet is atheistic.you miss my point, I was just clarifying why I believe he learns right and it's got nothing to do with the oppression of women.
How is voting for a candidate who will endorse and push forth people who'd work against woman's rights not a gradual form of oppression?
given we have seen how trump governs, it's unlikely we will see much in the way of damaging oppression in the next four years.
Pro-Life policies aren't damaging?
Need I point out Trump's administration launched a global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality.
What does that have to do with anything? I was talking about women's rights.
And if we do see some liberties you value abolished, what's the cost?
You say that like the costs are negligent.
You want to stand by your ideals while ignoring the countless balls trump is juggling, and doing so well?
What balls are those again?
like I said, it's always a trade off, and in another 4 years those liberties, if curtailed, could be reinstated. This isn't just about now, although it requires quick action and trump is moving fast, think long game.
Do you figure it'd do no damages to the environment, and that social changes are that simplistic?
"Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither." - Ben Franklinand maybe bare in mind how china views women and LGBTQ+
Racist.
lol alright tc, you miseed my edit, and your weak quips and clearly vastly different belief structure dont particularly make me want to engage.
Abortion is still legal in the US btw
Crimson said:But he is also super eco friendly and has been open about his more "leftist" views, including those involving female empowerment.His stances have nothing to do with what stances he's otherwise endorsing by proxy.
If an atheist advertises for Chic Fillet, that doesn't mean that Chic Fillet is atheistic.you miss my point, I was just clarifying why I believe he learns right and it's got nothing to do with the oppression of women.
How is voting for a candidate who will endorse and push forth people who'd work against woman's rights not a gradual form of oppression?
given we have seen how trump governs, it's unlikely we will see much in the way of damaging oppression in the next four years.
Pro-Life policies aren't damaging?
Need I point out Trump's administration launched a global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality.
What does that have to do with anything? I was talking about women's rights.
And if we do see some liberties you value abolished, what's the cost?
You say that like the costs are negligent.
You want to stand by your ideals while ignoring the countless balls trump is juggling, and doing so well?
What balls are those again?
like I said, it's always a trade off, and in another 4 years those liberties, if curtailed, could be reinstated. This isn't just about now, although it requires quick action and trump is moving fast, think long game.
Do you figure it'd do no damages to the environment, and that social changes are that simplistic?
"Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither." - Ben Franklinand maybe bare in mind how china views women and LGBTQ+
Racist.
lol alright tc, you miseed my edit, and your weak quips and clearly vastly different belief structure dont particularly make me want to engage.
Abortion is still legal in the US btw
argh fine alright a little bit more but THEN I'm disengaging.
it's true a lot of the republican base is pro-life, but trump is a business dem who ran on the republican ticket, he playing both sides, like he always does.
and any pro-life bill is gonna have to pass the house and senate anyway, he's not likely to even get the option.
and if he does, he knows that might be worse economically than uncontrolled migration
Crimson said:But he is also super eco friendly and has been open about his more "leftist" views, including those involving female empowerment.His stances have nothing to do with what stances he's otherwise endorsing by proxy.
If an atheist advertises for Chic Fillet, that doesn't mean that Chic Fillet is atheistic.you miss my point, I was just clarifying why I believe he learns right and it's got nothing to do with the oppression of women.
How is voting for a candidate who will endorse and push forth people who'd work against woman's rights not a gradual form of oppression?
given we have seen how trump governs, it's unlikely we will see much in the way of damaging oppression in the next four years.
Pro-Life policies aren't damaging?
Need I point out Trump's administration launched a global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality.
What does that have to do with anything? I was talking about women's rights.
And if we do see some liberties you value abolished, what's the cost?
You say that like the costs are negligent.
You want to stand by your ideals while ignoring the countless balls trump is juggling, and doing so well?
What balls are those again?
like I said, it's always a trade off, and in another 4 years those liberties, if curtailed, could be reinstated. This isn't just about now, although it requires quick action and trump is moving fast, think long game.
Do you figure it'd do no damages to the environment, and that social changes are that simplistic?
"Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither." - Ben Franklinand maybe bare in mind how china views women and LGBTQ+
Racist.
lol alright tc, you miseed my edit
Lets see if it improves your point at all:
Just thought too, trump employees a lot of women
and he's never said anything particularly sexist imo
That's irrelevant, beyond for the sake of cultivating his image, if the people he's putting in office don't follow the same accord. It's about the system he represents, the people behind him, the policies he passes through, not the figurehead's charisma.
when he said that grab em by the pussy shit he was just spilling the truth, people act like golddiggers ain't chasing young billionaires. and he said it in private, in a locker room, with a guy in a similar position.
I don't care that he said that stuff, and have been a Trump fan media-wise for far longer than you've probably known his name.
I care about policies, what to expect over the next four years, not media frenzy hype akin to the Bernie and Yang rush.
Hm... it really didn't strengthen your point at all.
, and your weak quips and clearly vastly different belief structure dont particularly make me want to engage.
You have nothing to engage with and are looking for an exit, as is more than apparent with the posts leading up to this one. Your reasoning at this point is desperate grasping at straws, not anything of substance, and it's a shame that that's how you handle your politics.
You have no material, just some sentiments about how he "seems" and a video from some eco-guy that you think's supposed to relationally show Trump's policies as as economically based as his own. Even trolls I've argued with on here for the sake of argument have put together better cases than this.
Abortion is still leagl in the US btw
They've been working on phasing it out alongside funding pro-life organizations that work to confuse and demoralize women from making the choices they'd prefer. He's made the government stacked with more pro-lifers than before during Trump's term, and my state's been one of the ones on the line to lose the right.
It's a state by state issue, and if you aren't even aware of his impact on women's rights to the point of conflating it with the LGBTQ+ agenda, then you don't have a clue what's going on.
it's true a lot of the republican base is pro-life, but trump is a business dem who ran on the republican ticket, he playing both sides, like he always does.
and any pro-life bill is gonna have to pass the house and senate anyway, he's not likely to even get the option.
and if he does, he knows that might be worse economically than uncontrolled migration
