This is the truth. This is what everyone has been trying to communicate.
This is the truth. This is what everyone has been trying to communicate.
Hope so. Unfortunately, this makes him look strong, in a time, when Biden looks weak. Maybe Biden could punch a reporter at the next presser to steal his thunder. Maybe Peter Doocey - he looks punchable.
I thought he said Battle Bots
Me too. I want someone to tell me when I’m wrong. What’s wrong with us?
I’ve watched this 69 times already.
Who are we going to vote for when Trump suspends elections?
I’m going to assume, from your replies, that you don’t think this election is a no-win situation?
But others do, which is illustrated in OP’s Arendt comment. Those concerns are material, whether true, or not. Dismissing vote abstainers, or third party voters, doesn’t address those concerns. Only Biden and the DNC can do that.
You have no idea what I’m trying to communicate and it’s disconcerting to me. It’s a failure on my part to communicate effectively. I’m sorry.
IMO the disconnect lies in the fact that many don’t see Biden as the “lesser evil.” They want to vote for Biden, because they’ve been influenced to think it is the only option.
Arendt is making an observation of a “no-win situation”.
Voters want a solution to that situation, so they make assumptions to come to a conclusion that fits the narrative they tell themselves.
Some, when faced with a no-win situation, choose to not play the game. Others, convince themselves that the lesser-evil is a desirable outcome. Many, myself included, want to “change the conditions of the test.”.
There is no viable solution. All choices are valid and should be respected.
It’s an informal fallacy.
Hannah Arendt was tankie?
Simple. If nobody votes, neither candidate will win.
He had a cold, okay. /s
deleted by creator
Damn right he does.
The RNC is this week, so I hope that still holds true.