they are already doing that by spreading “he came to us during biden administration”.
he worked for us occupation forces in afghanistan and when they withdrew, they let people who worked for them to come to us to prevent them being executed on the spot by taliban. guess which master of deals fucked up the whole withdrawal process?
jeez. that’s a lot of ai slop just to say “you were right”.
and to make things clear, i am absolutely not defending orange cheeto, i am saying it is useful to focus on a stuff that is clearly proven. because once you start including “maybe” accusations into your list, it is easy to discredit your criticism.
the chid rape is still in the area of heresay, while all the mentioned are proven facts.
why is it spelled like that?
yeah, orange cheeto should get into it, he would have these numbers down 5000 percent in no time…
What would that prove that the SC ruling from that article hasn’t already proven?
it could help you understand that us supreme court doesn’t rule behind us borders. whether it actually would, i have no idea.
Admittedly it’s hard to review the exchange after the majority of your comments have been removed.
i understand you are trying unconventional attack vectors, but 2 out of 5 is not a majority, swetie. i see you are as good in math as you are in law. i am done with this discussion, bye.
if you don’t want help understanding
you know what? go ahead and sue me, that will show me how right you are 😂
You’re on a US based social media website
maybe they did not tell you that, but there is whole rest of the world behind us borders and not everything is “us based”.
i am not us citizen on a website that is not hosted on us soil, doing something that is absolutely not illegal in my jurisdiction.
the only international cooperation you would get from justice system in my country would be showing you the middle finger, because “american snowflake did not like something they read on the internet” is not a crime here. go back to comics, or cry to mods, whichever you prefer.
You think I have to go to your country and sue you there? Collection would have some hoops, but obviously Americans can sue non-Americans. But your courts really wouldn’t be involved at all. Unless to cooperate with America.
i see your law knowledge also comes from comics 😂
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I’m sorry if I upset you It kind of sounds like you really didn’t get to percentages till at least jr high
i am sorry if i upset you by explaining how percentages work, but i have to say, this your idea that percentages are some kind of magic from high school explains a lot.
I could have spent this time explaining
you could have spent that time education yourself. contrary to what they told you, false confidence is NOT all you need.
Are you just going off highschool math when they taught you percentages?
are you going off elementary one where they did not? 😂
large part of this is that people just stopped bothering to hide it.
social networks are like unions for morons who found out they are not alone and can now feel safe in numbers.
not how statistics work. percentages apply to sample of any size.
imagine there were 100 voters in the last elections. trump got 50 of them and if he got all of this 15% group (unlikely, but it actually plays in his favor in this argument). that means 50*0,70=35 of his voters believed he was guilty and voted for him anyway.
if someone asks why 0,70 and not 0,85 (1-0,15) it is based on assumption that the we believe he is not guilty group was largely voting for him, which is not unreasonable assumption. if some of them were actually voting for democrats, that makes the number of people voting for him despite believing he is a child rapist even higher.
(this argument indeed ignores shift of this number in time).
Even then, pretty sure he didn’t get 50% of the votes.
even though it is irrelevant in this argument - he got 49.80% of votes and he won popular vote with 77,3M against harris’s 75M votes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election#Results
so 35% believe he is guilty and voted for him anyway.
If you give people no credit for admitting they were wrong or give them no chance to atone, then you give them no reason to do it and they will continue down the path they are on. To me it is preferable that she stops being toxic vs her continuing if those are the two choices.
i understand this argument, but if you enter politics by being willing to burn the society to the ground for your personal profit, that shouldn’t be easy to wave away. at least you shouldn’t be able to keep the profit from doing so.
imagine i steel your wallet and then say “oh, i regret that, but i have changed and i am a better person now, so please like me. also i’d like to keep that wallet.” that would be clearly absurd, and she is in similar position.
let her go work for the ngo and help poor people, after doing so for as long as she was evil, i may be willing to admit she really changed.
Yeah, the apologies are the first step, if she follows through and changes we can decide wgat to do.
she should never be given benefit of the doubt just because she “apologized”. her past conduct should not be forgotten, ever, no matter how strategically advantageous it might be for you at the moment. the end does not justify the means.
wtf, how much time did someone save by cutting these hands like this?