Then they are definitely breaking the law, so they can legally do more to stop it.

I still don’t see how any of this takes away from my point. Are you just saying that other countries have a vested interest in the continued existence of Ukraine as we know it? Because I know that, that’s why they started funding the war in the first place.

Let’s say that when Trump takes office he negotiates new terms with Putin. Zelensky will agree to those terms because he knows things will only be worse for his country if he continues fighting without US support.

Are you just trying to say that the us or other countries would never threaten to pull support because it would be foolish? If so, then you don’t know how common fools are. What is it you think Trump means when he says he will end the war immediately after taking power?

I don’t see how any of this takes away from what I said. Ukraine can’t continue the war themselves, so they have no choice but to do what their benefactors wish.

In principle I agree, but he doesn’t really have a choice. Other world leaders are providing the funds to continue the war in the first place. If Zelensky does something they don’t like, they can just stop the funding and end the war on Russian terms.

That’s very strange. In the schools I’ve been to it was just the pledge, and you don’t have to stand. They aren’t legally allowed to force you to stand or say it, but some schools do anyway.

He is a hired attorney.

Whenever I get a tech question its always about how to navigate a gui I am unfamiliar with. And when I can’t give them an answer, they assume I’m actually clueless about technology.

It does not have denuvo, and reviews are very positive although I haven’t played it myself.

Dan Hentschel is a prolific satirist.

They know the motive, they just don’t have enough proof to say it publicly. They like to keep things vague.

I am indifferent. That guy wasn’t the problem, its the system that allows him to exist. This sends a message but all I see it doing is convincing wealthy capitalists to invest more in their protection.

Every race/ethnicity/nationality thinks they have the worst parents.

So you’re telling me that most of the country agrees with her policy more than trump’s, yet the majority still voted for trump? I wonder if this might have something to do with racism and sexism.

I ignored the next paragraph because it doesn’t sometimes matter, it always matters. Racism doesn’t suddenly start working because a person made a mistake. It might latch on to a mistake, but it can and will work without it. That is what I believe happened this election.

Republicans have the racist/sexist vote locked up no matter who is running.

That is an extremely reductive narrative that ignores how prejudice actually works in this country. Racist and sexist biases conscious or not shaped perception of Harris on the left, right, and everywhere inbetween. Prejudice is not a binary thing. It is a cultural force that is more than capable of impacting the decision making of people who are not outwardly racist/sexist.

Left policy isn’t for the leftists, it’s for everyone except the capitalists.

America does not even remotely understand this, so they will not vote as such.

Do you think Biden would have won?

Not this time with how unpopular he is now, but any other white male option would have worked or at least had a better shot.

And then 5% of her vote came from registered republicans, down from 6% in 2020.

Because she’s a black woman.

She already had the vote of every leftist, because leftists hate trump more then they dislike her. The voters she needed were suburban white men, which is who she tried to appeal to. It didn’t work because of racism and sexism.

To be entirely honest, I don’t think that would work. I wish it were true she lost because all the real leftists stayed home or voted for trump in protest, but that’s obviously not true. She lost because this country is racist and sexist.

Actual leftists have no power over anything and are very small in number, that’s why she ran a more conservative campaign in the first place. But, it didn’t work. Despite doing everything in her power to not look like a leftist, everyone still labeled her as a radical leftist because she’s a black woman. That is why she lost.

Trusting that guy is a terrible idea. A random person is much more credible.

Your argument is one you see very often among those that espouse the lost cause narrative.

I will admit to misinterpreting a speech, but do not accuse me of that. Thinking Lincoln was not necessarily against slavery does not mean I am pro slavery.

I was unaware Lincoln held such strong abolitionist beliefs, he isn’t lying that he was quiet about it for a long time. Rereading the quote, it does seem clear he is carefully trying to avoid mentioning his actual attitudes on the subject while negotiating with the south.

I clearly haven’t done enough research into that part of Lincoln’s life. I apologize for acting like I have, that quote seemed very much like it was said by someone indifferent to slavery. And the initial use of abolitionism as a tool to help the north in the civil war lined up with that interpretation.

"I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. " – Abraham Lincoln

He literally could not have possibly been more clear about this.