@trek32@lemmy.world to Political Memes@lemmy.world • 1 year agoFar left intellectualismlemmy.worldimagemessage-square784fedilinkarrow-up11.46Karrow-down1401
arrow-up11.06Karrow-down1imageFar left intellectualismlemmy.world@trek32@lemmy.world to Political Memes@lemmy.world • 1 year agomessage-square784fedilink
minus-squarecurbsticklelinkfedilink-2•1 year agoOK, so claims of randos on the internet. NOT any single elected democrat. Got it.
minus-square@Fedizen@lemmy.worldlinkfedilink1•1 year agoAh so what matters is words not actions? Taking steps to remove 3rd parties from ballots is fine as long as you don’t say it?
minus-squarecurbsticklelinkfedilink1•edit-21 year agoWhat matter is context. Intentionally leaving it out is garbage. As is not saying which ballots you’re referring to. In this case, I assume its the presidential election where they are playing the role of spoiler? Yes, it absolutely makes sense to legally challenge those. But “some democrats” is just as garbage and useless a comment as “people are saying”. Edited to add: This is also definitively and explicitly not the same thing as saying ban all third parties. Nonsense. Utter nonsense.
OK, so claims of randos on the internet.
NOT any single elected democrat.
Got it.
Ah so what matters is words not actions? Taking steps to remove 3rd parties from ballots is fine as long as you don’t say it?
What matter is context. Intentionally leaving it out is garbage.
As is not saying which ballots you’re referring to. In this case, I assume its the presidential election where they are playing the role of spoiler?
Yes, it absolutely makes sense to legally challenge those.
But “some democrats” is just as garbage and useless a comment as “people are saying”.
Edited to add: This is also definitively and explicitly not the same thing as saying ban all third parties.
Nonsense. Utter nonsense.