Lurker > NatsuSama

The keyword is LOOKS.

I think people are fudging the numbers to make it look like growth at this point.

Is having a nice holiday meal not a time to splurge? Like I said, if one can afford it, go for it. You can have your value meal food any other time.

Millennials deserve the flack they get for their political apathy. They're absolutely useless as a voting demographic on average.

It is interesting just looking this up that there actually arent laws about leaving kids at home. So I wonder when the preference for day care started seeing how its ungodly expensive
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latchkey_kid

Low cost food is usually high, or higher, in preservatives, sodium, and sugar. Lot of high carb, empty calorie shit. And don't get me started on high fructose corn syrup.

So for a holiday meal, if you can afford it, go for the pricier, healthier stuff. Don't be cheap for the sake of being cheap.

my old white guy is better than your old white guy

I swear this board flip flops on Haley more than any other politician, except maybe Romney.

I don't really shop at Walmart. My local Giant food is pretty expensive.

A man having pepper spray says all we need to know about this.

What if you go to a wedding? I have always been petrified of dancing and how I look, but I have to remember that it makes my wife happy and she loves that I am a dork and doesn't care about my ability. Just that we can have fun.

Sure thats one way to describe the very real white savior problem

This time its making the local government look bad take.

It's no one's fault to judge a person for what they say and how they act and for their behavior.

Some people say they hate themselves but they still walking around acting all high and mighty still. It's obvious they're only vocal about hating themselves.

Where the fuck are their parents?

How do 12-13 year old kids get the idea to commit armed carjackings?

I've never heard someone say a man shouldn't be POTUS because they're too emotional. But go on, tell us about how men have it worse than women when it comes to stereotypes of emotions.

it's okay for men to be emotional and it's very accepted, the people that don't accept it their opinion also doesn't matter anyway

it's more accepted then you want it to be,again it's okay to show emotion,people are more willing to accept it then you think, the problem with men it's that men don't want to show emotion it has nothing to do with other people they don't want to accept their own emotions,it's men that have to accept themselves as vulnerable,it has nothing to do with society, society accepts it pretty well

i talked about movies because this topic is about male characters in fiction and even in reality it's okay for men to show emotion and even if people don't accept it show it anyway, push emotion into them until they have no choice but accept it, society doesn't accept anything it simply sees it so much that it stops caring about it, 90% of what is shown in movies now wasn't accepted years ago but they kept pushing and now it's normal

unless you live in like the 1940s, it's very okay for men to display emotion, there's several badass male characters that display emotion and people like those characters just look at john wick he display a lot of emotion in the movies and he's a badass character

They don't mock men either

Do you genuinely think I don't understand these basic things or are you just trying to smear me?

The conclusion is the same, even if they want different things. If you're trying to escape a serial killer by driving away and the serial killer (Republicans) is blocking your path and you (Democrats) genuinely want to escape, but don't put the keys in the ignition or turn the engine on (mobilizing people), the outcome is going to be you sitting there, regardless of what you want.

If you claim to pursue a goal, but don't utilize the tactics necessary to get there, you can't be surprised when you don't reach your goal. Not reaching the goal is what Republicans want and what we'll get if they're not stopped. So by not using the necessary tactics, you're getting to the same goal by a different route.

Let's tie this back to black voters. Lets say Dems want to end school segregation and funding disparities. Republicans want to keep things the same or even make them worse. Let's say that to fix that issue, funding would need to be a taken over by the state or federal government, and would no longer be based on the wealth of the school's area. If a lot of time, energy, and money is wasted on things that don't work, and the thing that does work is taken off the table, the outcome will be a Republican win (the status quo or worse) even though that's not what the Democrats wanted.

Also, I didn't say Democrats fear losing Republicans, I said they fear losing TO Republicans. Compromising into fake solutions that don't actually solve anything benefits Republicans and not Democrats. We have to waste our time defending half measures that still leave people suffering while Republicans prey on discontent and wait to reverse whatever gains we do make. The goal of politics is to solve problems, not merely be in office or pass something.

You conveniently cut out the part where I said "one is better than the other" so you could make your scripted, strawman point.

Not if you are a leftist.

The purist type. You mean people who want Democrats to do more then be Republicans lite. Or don't want the president to lie about seeing dead babies ?

How does that work? Isn't the whole point of the tailed beasts that they can never be permanently killed and will just regenerate?

Or did they do some goofy retcon to manufacture drama?

Yep that is possible but historically very aberrant.

They should rip the band aid off. If the reason Trump isn't getting the punishment he deserves is "But his cult might become violent", then we've already lost.

They're already violent. Multiple domestic terrorists and white supremacists already stand by him and has expressed a desire to kill people if they don't get their way.

Let justice be served. If someone wants to become a domestic terrorist over it, let justice be delivered. Otherwise you're putting more people in danger because imagine if Trump slips through all of this.

Imagine if he wins 2024.
Imagine if he loses.

His cult will be killing people regardless.

While I think the EC system is broken, I would like to point out that people in low-density areas deserve representation too, and direct voting means that any actions taken to favor urban areas count for thousands of times more. It would remove all incentive to care about low-density areas that are already lacking in infrastructure and opportunities.