trafficnab

I thought it was all the tankies from your instance flooding the fediverse with their tankie rhetoric, but it’s nice that you’re giving me the sole power to warp the public image

point out the classic tactic of spending a lot of time picking apart minor details in an attempt to discredit the whole

no u

My impression was that you guys were supposed to be more eloquent than this

No but it sure doesn’t help their public image willingly occupying the same spaces and appearing alongside them

Sorry I forgot to add “Ok but, were they really inside the square, or just near it?”

Spending the first 7/8ths of your comment dancing around the main issue (at a minimum hundreds, thankfully you at least have to admit to that since those are the official Chinese numbers, potentially thousands, of civilian protestors being killed by the Chinese military), laser focusing on some minor detail like it’s a great big gotcha, then brushing the whole thing off at the end with “Yep it’s bad, but it happens shrug” is exactly what I’m talking about

I guess I should at least thank you for so deftly illustrating my point though

I guess I just don’t see much benefit in fraternizing with them, the optics on it are bad (see: hexbear being labeled and dismissed as a tankie instance), and if they’re the ones who ultimately win, things historically have not gone well for the anarchists and anyone else who values personal liberties

I didn’t call anyone a tankie, a whole bunch of people from hexbear sure did show up feeling incredibly offended by my description of tankies though, if they want to out themselves like that, that’s on them

I suppose it would ultimately be up to the supreme court to define what exactly that eligibility requirement (that you basically have to have never tried to overthrow the government) as written in the constitution means, but that doesn’t actually immediately involve a conviction of Trump for anything (as “being under the age of 35” doesn’t require some sort of criminal conviction)

In the hypothetical scenario, someone would try to remove him from the ballot, and the supreme court would either uphold or reject that based on their interpretation of the language of the amendment

Current number of comments on this post visible from

lemm.ee: 742 lemmy.ca: 261

It’s strong circumstantial evidence that the attack on the capitol (which itself is just a component of his overall objective to illegally overturn the election results) was his intention all along

I would hope there’s not too many useful idiots who think left unity will get them anything but a free ride to a “re-education” camp