• GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Just repeating it and sticking your head in the sand doesn’t make it so.

      If you feel capable of refuting the point, lay out any example you can provide, that meets my original premise. Edit I provided a clear simple case to discuss the situation, which you haven’t been able to refute.

      (Edit: For clarity), I acknowledge many places in the US are NOT competitive, thus the scarce vote concept is much less relevant. Location was always in my comments, so that is not a goalpost move.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Ok Dr strange.

          There are 2 competitive candidates for president. One of them WILL be president.

          How you get there is a mix of direct and indirect actions. You do not seem able to grasp or refute that indirect actions can have an influence on the frontrunners.

          That’s on you.

          • PeggyLouBaldwin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            you’re inability to tell the truth plainly and without hyperbole or fallacy has resulted in you spreading election misinformation. all I’ve done here is try to keep the rhetoric honest